Howdy, Stranger!

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

The Lowest Common Denominator Sucks Prunes

AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 4,387
If you really want a really good MMORPG, with wide appeal, you want a diverse set of gamer types. 
And if you want that, then each style needs to be created for good game play. 

But the lowest common denominator removes good game play from such aspects as economy and exploration in order to make it "easy."
Easy FOR ALL players. Even those who aren't good at it and don't want to learn any tricks of the trade, etc. Don't want to spend the time and effort into learning the skills involved, which aren't always in code but rather in a player's personal abilities. 

I think each aspect of game play needs to be made for players who actually enjoy the challenges of that particular sort of game play. 
And not for everyone. 
Otherwise, you get boring game play for those who care about those aspects. And that's not a recipe for keeping customers. 

Once upon a time....

AlBQuirkyShaighBruceYeeKyleranAeanderTuor7LackingMMOGdemamiScotbcbullyand 3 others.
«134

Comments

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 6,707
    I've said for a long while that I'd rather see many different smaller MMORPGs made for specific playstyles than one huge MMORPG that tries to please everyone. But all we get are attempts to please as many as possibe MMORPGs.

    The gaming industry confuses me, I admit. On one hand, they everyone playing their games. On the other, they make games exclusive.

    I guess money is the be all, end all of gaming, too :(
    UngoodKyleranLackingMMOBloodaxesGdemami

    - 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


  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 4,387
    AlBQuirky said:
    I've said for a long while that I'd rather see many different smaller MMORPGs made for specific playstyles than one huge MMORPG that tries to please everyone. But all we get are attempts to please as many as possibe MMORPGs.

    The gaming industry confuses me, I admit. On one hand, they everyone playing their games. On the other, they make games exclusive.

    I guess money is the be all, end all of gaming, too :(
    The key to any MMORPG is holding onto players after they try it. 
    Most of them are pretty much the same thing, with the same game play. 

    The biggest thing is the PvE. The combat, dungeons, and related content of that nature. 
    But all the outlier stuff like the economy, harvesting, building and homes, all that stuff is also added game play. But it's so basic and lackluster as far as game play elements. 

    Every aspect can be improved to be more interesting. There's a lot of game play that's left on the table and simply not done well at all. And there are players who like the game to be more rounded for what you can do in it. 
    Hack and Slash gets boring after a while. And this other stuff is a way for more players to make a name for themselves, to be somewhat more distinguished. To have something to claim as a part of their identity. 
    Gdemamibcbully

    Once upon a time....

  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 6,687
    A game for all is doable, but it would have to be a large game.


    Vanilla World of Warcraft,
    If too hard play easy content.



    30 days games made it worst, and that's most modern mmorpgs.
    Gdemami
  • Gamer54321Gamer54321 Member UncommonPosts: 452
    edited March 2020
    I suspect game devs in general are just not particularily intelligent when it comes to creativity. Presumably preferring easy, already known solutions and ideas, before trying to actually design something that isn't based on a gimmick (simplicity).

    And then there are actual game devs that thinks "fun" is a meaningful concept that makes any sense to set as a goal in and of itself. Bullshit!
    Gdemami
  • cameltosiscameltosis Member EpicPosts: 2,913
    It shouldn't be one or the other.

    If you appeal only to lowest common denominator then most players will find it pretty boring. They'll play for a bit, then leave. Your game is going to rely on churn too much.

    If you only aim content at those who already like that content, again, you'll be missing out on too many players and will likely end up very niche.


    So, you need a good mix on difficulties all the way through the game. Whether you want difficulty distributed "normally" (the bell curve) so that most is average difficulty, with some easy and some hard, or whether you want more of a sliding scale with everything easy to begin with but getting progressively harder and harder?


    My biggest gripe with this sort of thing is that if your game is going to have difficult content, the game needs to be a good educator. Most aren't. Even simple things like the trinity? Can't think of any game that actually teaches a tank how to tank, you just get thrown in. Thats not been a problem for me as I have the RPG history to know how it works, but imagine being an actual newcomer to the genre. It must be overwhelming at times! Especially in the modern era of trivially easy leveling, then massive jump to endgame. Such dumb design!

    Give players the on-ramp they need to take them from trivial to hard.


    But also, don't be afraid if some players can't do something. If they suck, they suck. Don't pander to them.
    AmarantharKyleranAlBQuirkyGdemami
  • TheocritusTheocritus Member EpicPosts: 8,202
    Look no further than games like Fortnite.....They've made millions and a 5 year old can play it...That is what the industry wants.
    KyleranAlBQuirky[Deleted User]
  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member EpicPosts: 1,964
    edited March 2020
    Look no further than games like Fortnite.....They've made millions and a 5 year old can play it...That is what the industry wants.
    It’s more in line with “easy to play but difficult to master” than just “easy”. If it was just easy it wouldn’t have lasted. Similar to why cod has lasted so long. 

    People can try to shit Fortnite but it just shows ignorance. No I don’t play it, I’m just observant. 
    AlBQuirky[Deleted User]
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 4,387
    It shouldn't be one or the other.

    If you appeal only to lowest common denominator then most players will find it pretty boring. They'll play for a bit, then leave. Your game is going to rely on churn too much.

    If you only aim content at those who already like that content, again, you'll be missing out on too many players and will likely end up very niche.


    So, you need a good mix on difficulties all the way through the game. Whether you want difficulty distributed "normally" (the bell curve) so that most is average difficulty, with some easy and some hard, or whether you want more of a sliding scale with everything easy to begin with but getting progressively harder and harder?


    My biggest gripe with this sort of thing is that if your game is going to have difficult content, the game needs to be a good educator. Most aren't. Even simple things like the trinity? Can't think of any game that actually teaches a tank how to tank, you just get thrown in. Thats not been a problem for me as I have the RPG history to know how it works, but imagine being an actual newcomer to the genre. It must be overwhelming at times! Especially in the modern era of trivially easy leveling, then massive jump to endgame. Such dumb design!

    Give players the on-ramp they need to take them from trivial to hard.


    But also, don't be afraid if some players can't do something. If they suck, they suck. Don't pander to them.
    I like the concept of education in MMORPGs. I like to learn about things, and especially if it's fun while you learn. "Doing" is a lot more fun than watching. Games offer the chance to do things that you don't get in real life, due to access and costs. And they should be trying to put this into their MMORPGs in greater detail. 
    "It's not work if you're having fun." 

    Within playability, and reason, of course. 
    But then all that's subjective too. Still, games are not offering knowledge of "how it was done", and should be. 

    I think each thing a player does should have a scaling up difficulty that relies on knowledge. 

    In game terms:
    - Smelting ore is a relatively easy step with basic knowledge. But making alloys is more complex. And this offers the player possibilities to experiment for better results. 
    - Searching for common "herbs" is easy early level play. But finding those rare special herbs for greater uses in potions should require more knowledge. In RL, mushroom hunters look for "signs", and that should be in a good game for higher progression herbs. 
    You need a changing world for that, I suppose. It's time that gets put into our MMORPGs anyways, to enough extent that it's playable, anyways. 

    But you can see, I hope, how advancement can be more and more difficult and yet give a feeling of real accomplishment. And that's a fun thing, in my mind. 
    Gdemami

    Once upon a time....

  • XodicXodic Member EpicPosts: 1,324
    Look no further than games like Fortnite.....They've made millions billions and a 5 year old can play it...That is what the industry wants.

    Kyleran
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,187
    I used to think the same thing, but over the years I’ve slowly become the lowest common denominator.
    KyleranAlBQuirkyVermillion_Raventhal[Deleted User]
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 18,805
    OP seemed to miss his own points...sigh

    If you are better at said such "skills"would it not then be TOO EASY for you versus said noob?

    You mention that they should learn the skills or whatever else.No two people are ever going to be the same...ever.For one person something is way easier than it is for the other person,this will always remain as fact.

    Even using the same point "EASY"there are more lines than just hard or easy,we can game somewhere in between.
    This topic goes way deeper than this simple chit chat but i can't get into it in less than 5 paragraphs.

    Bottom line is that pvp and pve CANNOT exist in the same plane,there is absolutely no way.Further more pvp players will always be crying foul for nerfs or buffs,this class is better than class,it ends up being like Blizzard,always changing classes never getting it right.

    You know when it is right,when it is ONLY pve because you do NOT need to be balanced in pve.The only logical argument that would then come up is the topic of that healer class is better than my healer class so i can't get in any groups.That is why a good develoepr makes sure EACH class brings something to the table.You also need CHOICES,not LINEAR progression/combat.Choices so that different group archetypes can choose different areas to setup camp instead of everyone in the same area.
    Amaranthar

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

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 15,455
    I recently saw a post here saying that separating PvP into it's own zone(s) sucks because if you're a 100% PvE player you're "forced to PvP" if you go to those zones.

    To me that's a perfect example of the mentality by some who believe that they have an inalienable right to play every part of an MMO and go anywhere whether that's actually their thing or not.

    Same as bitching about not having access to bind-on-pick-up raid gear when you don't raid.

    Large and expensive MMO projects try to cater to many different people for the obvious reason that they need a lot of different people with different interests to buy in order to break even or turn a profit - that's an OK thing. But making all parts of it accessible for everyone is pretty short sighted. The goal should be to make each different part of it like exploration, crafting, raiding, PvP, etc., a good experience for the portion of their audience that really cares about that part.

    Otherwise, yeah, you end up with mediocre systems that everyone can do but no one really enjoys.
    ChildoftheShadowsKyleranAlBQuirkySensaiimmodiumtzervoGdemamiSovrath
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

    "... the "influencers" which is the tech name we call sell outs now..."
    __ Wizardry, 2020
  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 9,195
    I think games can scale to accommodate different levels of skill. Adding extra mobs with better skill sets and bosses with more mechanics is not outside the depth of any community. Having casual gamers adds allot to a game. You would not want to play an MMO of just hardcore gamers. It's like dating a high maintenance woman may look good on your arm but rest assured it will be the death of you and burn you out. 
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 4,387
    Wizardry said:
    OP seemed to miss his own points...sigh

    If you are better at said such "skills"would it not then be TOO EASY for you versus said noob?

    You mention that they should learn the skills or whatever else.No two people are ever going to be the same...ever.For one person something is way easier than it is for the other person,this will always remain as fact.

    Even using the same point "EASY"there are more lines than just hard or easy,we can game somewhere in between.
    This topic goes way deeper than this simple chit chat but i can't get into it in less than 5 paragraphs.

    Bottom line is that pvp and pve CANNOT exist in the same plane,there is absolutely no way.Further more pvp players will always be crying foul for nerfs or buffs,this class is better than class,it ends up being like Blizzard,always changing classes never getting it right.

    You know when it is right,when it is ONLY pve because you do NOT need to be balanced in pve.The only logical argument that would then come up is the topic of that healer class is better than my healer class so i can't get in any groups.That is why a good develoepr makes sure EACH class brings something to the table.You also need CHOICES,not LINEAR progression/combat.Choices so that different group archetypes can choose different areas to setup camp instead of everyone in the same area.
    I don't even know where you are coming from with this. 
    Easier does not equal easy. If that helps. Even so, comparing a maxed character to a newb character, you'd expect much newbie content to be "easy" for the maxed out character. That's reasonable. But that's comparing one newb level MOB against a maxed character. How does 20 of that newbie MOB against the maxed character fit? That can be "easy" or "risky." In most games, it's a matter of a few swings of a sword or a couple of fireballs. I'd like to see a game where those 20 newb grade MOBs offers some risk of defeat, mostly in terms of critical hits or simply overwhelming the defenses for damage that counts. 

    Where did PvP come into this? That's another subject, but the same issues apply. You can have "lowest common denominator" or you can build a game that's got more to it. Whether there's PvP or not. 

    Yes, PvP and PvE can coexist. I've talked about true Justice Systems over the years until my nose bleeds. But no one listens. Because no one wants to find the middle ground. 
    So be it. I don't need one or the other. 

    And yes, you do need some semblance of balance, even in a PvE game. 

    That's just some comments in reply. Like I said, I don't know where you are coming from here. 
    Maybe if you stop thinking in terms of massive power gaps? I don't know. 


    Gdemami

    Once upon a time....

  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 4,387
    Iselin said:
    I recently saw a post here saying that separating PvP into it's own zone(s) sucks because if you're a 100% PvE player you're "forced to PvP" if you go to those zones.

    To me that's a perfect example of the mentality by some who believe that they have an inalienable right to play every part of an MMO and go anywhere whether that's actually their thing or not.

    Same as bitching about not having access to bind-on-pick-up raid gear when you don't raid.

    Large and expensive MMO projects try to cater to many different people for the obvious reason that they need a lot of different people with different interests to buy in order to break even or turn a profit - that's an OK thing. But making all parts of it accessible for everyone is pretty short sighted. The goal should be to make each different part of it like exploration, crafting, raiding, PvP, etc., a good experience for the portion of their audience that really cares about that part.

    Otherwise, yeah, you end up with mediocre systems that everyone can do but no one really enjoys.

    I agree in the concept as you stated it, except for the world being divided part. 
    Again, I don't know where PvP came into this subject, but I guess it needs to since some games have it. 

    In my opinion, if you have PvP zones, inevitably there is loot/resources there, and most games make it something different than what's available elsewhere. Lots of them make it the best stuff for whatever it's used for. 
    But why do we need that when we can just plop PvP in the rest of the world, and still keep it separate from PvE players? 
    If you have a war, others are not part of it. There is more a game can do, but it doesn't have to, although I'd recommend they do. Just keep the PvPing separate from those who don't sign up and it can all happen in the same world. The PvEers aren't left out of parts of the world's content. 

    Again, all of this is a separate issue from what I OPed. 

    Once upon a time....

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 15,455
    Iselin said:
    I recently saw a post here saying that separating PvP into it's own zone(s) sucks because if you're a 100% PvE player you're "forced to PvP" if you go to those zones.

    To me that's a perfect example of the mentality by some who believe that they have an inalienable right to play every part of an MMO and go anywhere whether that's actually their thing or not.

    Same as bitching about not having access to bind-on-pick-up raid gear when you don't raid.

    Large and expensive MMO projects try to cater to many different people for the obvious reason that they need a lot of different people with different interests to buy in order to break even or turn a profit - that's an OK thing. But making all parts of it accessible for everyone is pretty short sighted. The goal should be to make each different part of it like exploration, crafting, raiding, PvP, etc., a good experience for the portion of their audience that really cares about that part.

    Otherwise, yeah, you end up with mediocre systems that everyone can do but no one really enjoys.

    I agree in the concept as you stated it, except for the world being divided part. 
    Again, I don't know where PvP came into this subject, but I guess it needs to since some games have it. 

    In my opinion, if you have PvP zones, inevitably there is loot/resources there, and most games make it something different than what's available elsewhere. Lots of them make it the best stuff for whatever it's used for. 
    But why do we need that when we can just plop PvP in the rest of the world, and still keep it separate from PvE players? 
    If you have a war, others are not part of it. There is more a game can do, but it doesn't have to, although I'd recommend they do. Just keep the PvPing separate from those who don't sign up and it can all happen in the same world. The PvEers aren't left out of parts of the world's content. 

    Again, all of this is a separate issue from what I OPed. 
    You didn't mention PvP in your OP but it's a very simple jump to that from what you did say:

    "I think each aspect of game play needs to be made for players who actually enjoy the challenges of that particular sort of game play. And not for everyone."

    What you're talking about is having sub categories of MMO activities catering to those who enjoy really getting into those activities. That by definition is exclusivity and is the opposite end of the spectrum from "lowest common denominator" which is all about making all things accessible to all people.

    I brought up PvP because that same kind of discussion has been going on a lot around here lately with respect to New World and its gimmicky flagging system.

    A natural consequence of your idea of making sub-systems for the players who actually enjoy those sub-systems and not for everyone is excluding some from access to some things that are only obtainable in those sub-systems.

    I'm simply extending the same concept to places in the game but you seem to draw a line there because there may be rewards there that you want. I don't draw that line.
    AlBQuirkyGdemami
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

    "... the "influencers" which is the tech name we call sell outs now..."
    __ Wizardry, 2020
  • TEKK3NTEKK3N Member RarePosts: 1,115
    I think people are misreading the OP.
    The problem is not Casual vs Hardcore playstyle but more the case of creating many different games for different niche.

    That's what makes better games, but it also mean cutting out 80% of your customer base.
    Big business cannot afford this, so if we want to see good games we have to hope for some hungry Indie developer who do things with passion rather than having the revenues as their main driving force.

    Sadly, that's the way it is.
    AlBQuirkyGdemami
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,419
    I actually find mmorpg have very hard content.

    Usually you started easy, get through 95% of the content with no problem, and you hit a brick wall.
    KyleranUngood
  • Hawkaya399Hawkaya399 Member UncommonPosts: 604
    edited March 2020
    If you really want a really good MMORPG, with wide appeal, you want a diverse set of gamer types. 
    And if you want that, then each style needs to be created for good game play. 

    But the lowest common denominator removes good game play from such aspects as economy and exploration in order to make it "easy."
    Easy FOR ALL players. Even those who aren't good at it and don't want to learn any tricks of the trade, etc. Don't want to spend the time and effort into learning the skills involved, which aren't always in code but rather in a player's personal abilities. 

    I think each aspect of game play needs to be made for players who actually enjoy the challenges of that particular sort of game play. 
    And not for everyone. 
    Otherwise, you get boring game play for those who care about those aspects. And that's not a recipe for keeping customers. 

    What they do is make treadmill gameplay. They know thye can't make the best experience for everyone because that would mean tailoring it for each specific person, so they try to hook everyone on something common with all of them and, most importantly, doing it very well. Ideally, it's big budget and they can produce the best graphics and story for the game. While each player will experience moments of disgust or boredom, they'll keep playing because the treadmil. I think the treadmil is the common thing between us all. We love to climb the ladder and gain levels. We love to acquire things and become a part of that world. Moreso, once a player has played an MMO for a while they tend to stay with that MMO. Players are very sticky once a bond is created. Even if there're better MMO's out there, a player won't try them long enough to leave the MMO they're bonded with. Maybe it's instinct to stay with the family. And that's another reason we stay. We have friends and guild(s) there.
    AlBQuirky
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,187
    I’m still surprised, back when SOE ran a lot of various MMOs, that they didn’t link them all together under a common account AND lobby.

    they had PS Home on the PS3 that was just a giant virtual lobby. just link everything together and let people keep a common community but jump from game/environment
  • Hawkaya399Hawkaya399 Member UncommonPosts: 604
    edited March 2020
    AAAMEOW said:
    I actually find mmorpg have very hard content.

    Usually you started easy, get through 95% of the content with no problem, and you hit a brick wall.

    Do you mean grindier? Like it's 50-300 early on for augs, but near endgame hte price goes up to 1500?

    And btw I don't believe we should "get through 95% of the content with no problem". That's not gameplay. Gameplay should be challenging. We should fail now and then and when we start to succeed more frequently a good game will, just at the right time, introduce more things to learn and utilize in gameplay to keep us challenged.
    Gdemami
  • Hawkaya399Hawkaya399 Member UncommonPosts: 604
    edited March 2020
    If you really want a really good MMORPG, with wide appeal, you want a diverse set of gamer types. 
    And if you want that, then each style needs to be created for good game play. 

    But the lowest common denominator removes good game play from such aspects as economy and exploration in order to make it "easy."
    Easy FOR ALL players. Even those who aren't good at it and don't want to learn any tricks of the trade, etc. Don't want to spend the time and effort into learning the skills involved, which aren't always in code but rather in a player's personal abilities. 

    I think each aspect of game play needs to be made for players who actually enjoy the challenges of that particular sort of game play. 
    And not for everyone. 
    Otherwise, you get boring game play for those who care about those aspects. And that's not a recipe for keeping customers. 

    I just realized PvP servers are a great example of what you're stating here. In a normally PvE-only MMORPG, introduincg PvP open world would be problematic. However, some of them opt to have PvP servers. This way, players desiring PvE don't have to deal with anything PvP-related, ever. Neither do PvP players have to cope with PvE-only players who're constantly complaining about PvP zones and not having enough safezones. The only downside is designing classes/abilities/etc for PvE servers can have consequencs for PvP servers, so designers have to pay more attention to what they're doing. This means they have to make two games: one for PvE and one for PvP. Some studios just don't have the manpower to accomplish it.

    And that's where the probelm occurs wiht your idea of not making it for everyone, but make it very specifically. What it amoutns to is making more than one game. One game for this and one game for that and one game for... At some juncture even the best development teams will fail to do it without massive infusions of moeny to allow it.

    And so we end up where we're at now. It's evolution. Different studios reelease different games, instead of trying to make a game for each playstyle all in one.  It's physics more than choice.

    EDIT:
    And honestly when i really think on it, i don't really think there's ever been an MMORPG for everyone. Yes they try. They do water things down attempting to appeal to everyone. To some extent they succeed. But I think what happens is htey end up appealing to a certain segment of the population that likes it watered down in that particular way, even though they're not trying to appeal to them. It's true we all like treadmils and we do tend to stay unnecessarily long with MMO's we're bonded to, but that doesn't mean we're going to play the MMO's made for everyone. We may play them for a while because we all want to try different things, but that doesn't mean we're going to suffer through the watered down gameplay indefinitely--unless we happen to like it how it's. Eventually we settle onto what we like and really want.

    So what I'm speculating here is MMORPGs that try to combine PvE and PvP open world are really just appealing to players who like it that wya, as opposed to appealing to PvE-only and PvP-only players in one MMO (ie. everyone). And maybe any MMORPG that tries to appeal to many playstyles is really just appealing to hybrid gamers who're drawn to many different playstyles, or at least drawn to the idea of a MMO with many playstyles.
    Post edited by Hawkaya399 on
    AlBQuirkyGdemami
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 4,387
    edited March 2020
    Iselin said:
    Iselin said:
    I recently saw a post here saying that separating PvP into it's own zone(s) sucks because if you're a 100% PvE player you're "forced to PvP" if you go to those zones.

    To me that's a perfect example of the mentality by some who believe that they have an inalienable right to play every part of an MMO and go anywhere whether that's actually their thing or not.

    Same as bitching about not having access to bind-on-pick-up raid gear when you don't raid.

    Large and expensive MMO projects try to cater to many different people for the obvious reason that they need a lot of different people with different interests to buy in order to break even or turn a profit - that's an OK thing. But making all parts of it accessible for everyone is pretty short sighted. The goal should be to make each different part of it like exploration, crafting, raiding, PvP, etc., a good experience for the portion of their audience that really cares about that part.

    Otherwise, yeah, you end up with mediocre systems that everyone can do but no one really enjoys.

    I agree in the concept as you stated it, except for the world being divided part. 
    Again, I don't know where PvP came into this subject, but I guess it needs to since some games have it. 

    In my opinion, if you have PvP zones, inevitably there is loot/resources there, and most games make it something different than what's available elsewhere. Lots of them make it the best stuff for whatever it's used for. 
    But why do we need that when we can just plop PvP in the rest of the world, and still keep it separate from PvE players? 
    If you have a war, others are not part of it. There is more a game can do, but it doesn't have to, although I'd recommend they do. Just keep the PvPing separate from those who don't sign up and it can all happen in the same world. The PvEers aren't left out of parts of the world's content. 

    Again, all of this is a separate issue from what I OPed. 
    You didn't mention PvP in your OP but it's a very simple jump to that from what you did say:

    "I think each aspect of game play needs to be made for players who actually enjoy the challenges of that particular sort of game play. And not for everyone."

    What you're talking about is having sub categories of MMO activities catering to those who enjoy really getting into those activities. That by definition is exclusivity and is the opposite end of the spectrum from "lowest common denominator" which is all about making all things accessible to all people.

    I brought up PvP because that same kind of discussion has been going on a lot around here lately with respect to New World and its gimmicky flagging system.

    A natural consequence of your idea of making sub-systems for the players who actually enjoy those sub-systems and not for everyone is excluding some from access to some things that are only obtainable in those sub-systems.

    I'm simply extending the same concept to places in the game but you seem to draw a line there because there may be rewards there that you want. I don't draw that line.
    Bah! Let the PvPers play for the same stuff as everyone else. 
    Why do they get special treatment? 

    IselinAlBQuirky

    Once upon a time....

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 15,455
    Iselin said:
    Iselin said:
    I recently saw a post here saying that separating PvP into it's own zone(s) sucks because if you're a 100% PvE player you're "forced to PvP" if you go to those zones.

    To me that's a perfect example of the mentality by some who believe that they have an inalienable right to play every part of an MMO and go anywhere whether that's actually their thing or not.

    Same as bitching about not having access to bind-on-pick-up raid gear when you don't raid.

    Large and expensive MMO projects try to cater to many different people for the obvious reason that they need a lot of different people with different interests to buy in order to break even or turn a profit - that's an OK thing. But making all parts of it accessible for everyone is pretty short sighted. The goal should be to make each different part of it like exploration, crafting, raiding, PvP, etc., a good experience for the portion of their audience that really cares about that part.

    Otherwise, yeah, you end up with mediocre systems that everyone can do but no one really enjoys.

    I agree in the concept as you stated it, except for the world being divided part. 
    Again, I don't know where PvP came into this subject, but I guess it needs to since some games have it. 

    In my opinion, if you have PvP zones, inevitably there is loot/resources there, and most games make it something different than what's available elsewhere. Lots of them make it the best stuff for whatever it's used for. 
    But why do we need that when we can just plop PvP in the rest of the world, and still keep it separate from PvE players? 
    If you have a war, others are not part of it. There is more a game can do, but it doesn't have to, although I'd recommend they do. Just keep the PvPing separate from those who don't sign up and it can all happen in the same world. The PvEers aren't left out of parts of the world's content. 

    Again, all of this is a separate issue from what I OPed. 
    You didn't mention PvP in your OP but it's a very simple jump to that from what you did say:

    "I think each aspect of game play needs to be made for players who actually enjoy the challenges of that particular sort of game play. And not for everyone."

    What you're talking about is having sub categories of MMO activities catering to those who enjoy really getting into those activities. That by definition is exclusivity and is the opposite end of the spectrum from "lowest common denominator" which is all about making all things accessible to all people.

    I brought up PvP because that same kind of discussion has been going on a lot around here lately with respect to New World and its gimmicky flagging system.

    A natural consequence of your idea of making sub-systems for the players who actually enjoy those sub-systems and not for everyone is excluding some from access to some things that are only obtainable in those sub-systems.

    I'm simply extending the same concept to places in the game but you seem to draw a line there because there may be rewards there that you want. I don't draw that line.
    Bah! Let the PvPers play for the same stuff as everyone else. 
    Why do they get special treatment? 

    Why do crafters or raiders? I don't raid any more - not that I ever did it a lot - so I'm resigned to the fact that I will just never have some raid-exclusive bind on pick-up gear and that a lot of developer time is being "wasted" on content I will never do.

    It's my choice and I'm willing to live with the consequences. If everyone was like me with respect to the parts of MMOs they don't want to do there would be a lot less whining about things you're "missing out on." Just my 2 cents.
    AlBQuirkyGdemamiJean-Luc_Picard
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

    "... the "influencers" which is the tech name we call sell outs now..."
    __ Wizardry, 2020
  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member EpicPosts: 1,964
    Iselin said:
    Iselin said:
    Iselin said:
    I recently saw a post here saying that separating PvP into it's own zone(s) sucks because if you're a 100% PvE player you're "forced to PvP" if you go to those zones.

    To me that's a perfect example of the mentality by some who believe that they have an inalienable right to play every part of an MMO and go anywhere whether that's actually their thing or not.

    Same as bitching about not having access to bind-on-pick-up raid gear when you don't raid.

    Large and expensive MMO projects try to cater to many different people for the obvious reason that they need a lot of different people with different interests to buy in order to break even or turn a profit - that's an OK thing. But making all parts of it accessible for everyone is pretty short sighted. The goal should be to make each different part of it like exploration, crafting, raiding, PvP, etc., a good experience for the portion of their audience that really cares about that part.

    Otherwise, yeah, you end up with mediocre systems that everyone can do but no one really enjoys.

    I agree in the concept as you stated it, except for the world being divided part. 
    Again, I don't know where PvP came into this subject, but I guess it needs to since some games have it. 

    In my opinion, if you have PvP zones, inevitably there is loot/resources there, and most games make it something different than what's available elsewhere. Lots of them make it the best stuff for whatever it's used for. 
    But why do we need that when we can just plop PvP in the rest of the world, and still keep it separate from PvE players? 
    If you have a war, others are not part of it. There is more a game can do, but it doesn't have to, although I'd recommend they do. Just keep the PvPing separate from those who don't sign up and it can all happen in the same world. The PvEers aren't left out of parts of the world's content. 

    Again, all of this is a separate issue from what I OPed. 
    You didn't mention PvP in your OP but it's a very simple jump to that from what you did say:

    "I think each aspect of game play needs to be made for players who actually enjoy the challenges of that particular sort of game play. And not for everyone."

    What you're talking about is having sub categories of MMO activities catering to those who enjoy really getting into those activities. That by definition is exclusivity and is the opposite end of the spectrum from "lowest common denominator" which is all about making all things accessible to all people.

    I brought up PvP because that same kind of discussion has been going on a lot around here lately with respect to New World and its gimmicky flagging system.

    A natural consequence of your idea of making sub-systems for the players who actually enjoy those sub-systems and not for everyone is excluding some from access to some things that are only obtainable in those sub-systems.

    I'm simply extending the same concept to places in the game but you seem to draw a line there because there may be rewards there that you want. I don't draw that line.
    Bah! Let the PvPers play for the same stuff as everyone else. 
    Why do they get special treatment? 

    Why do crafters or raiders? I don't raid any more - not that I ever did it a lot - so I'm resigned to the fact that I will just never have some raid-exclusive bind on pick-up gear and that a lot of developer time is being "wasted" on content I will never do.

    It's my choice and I'm willing to live with the consequences. If everyone was like me with respect to the parts of MMOs they don't want to do there would be a lot less whining about things you're "missing out on." Just my 2 cents.
    That’s why I think trade is so important. If something is locked behind Pvp, raid, group, or random content then you can still work out a way to get it. 
    AlBQuirky
Sign In or Register to comment.