Gated Content in MMOs - With All There is to Do, It's Not a Bad Thing - Saga of Lucimia - MMORPG.com

SBFord · February 2018

Gated Content in MMOs - With All There is to Do, It's Not a Bad Thing - Saga of Lucimia - MMORPG.com

Saga of Lucimia News - The latest Mondays in MMOs has been published on the Saga of Lucimia site, this time tackling the issue of gated content. Citing the real world example of bike riding, the feeling is that everyone can enjoy riding bicycles, but that there are levels of expertise that only the "most elite" will attain do to their dedication and level of proficiency. This can also be applied to MMOs such as SoL. "Players will need to meet certain standards of entry...to progress any further down the quest line".

Read the full story here

SBFord · February 2018

Gotta admit that the "riding bicycles" analogy was a good one. Makes complete sense in MMOs too. Good post.

sayuu · February 2018

the only gates I dont like are artificial timegates.

such as "you need 400 l33t tokens to get the necessary rep with the L33t faction in able to attune to the L33t tier of L33trock castle raid, you can get 1 token every month"

Wizardry · February 2018

No it's a terrible way to design a game.

Gated is perhaps the correct term to use but i noticed somebody talking about it the other day in game.Someone in EQ2 said the "title"implies mostly or lot's of questing,to which i can't argue and makes sense.However devs are ALSO adding the title MMO and the title RPG and if your game design deters from either,then your not designing the game properly according to the genre.

So using the cicyle analogy,it is like saying,it is ok to ride a bike,it is ok to follow that linear path or road but if your riding a bike wearing snowshoes and football shoulder pads,your not doing it right and looks way out of place.If your riding that bike with a flat tire,your doing wrong and looks out of place,if the INSIDE content/tires don't have any spokes you won't last long on that ride.

The thing the term "QUEST"really has been diluted badly.We all have an idea of what a quest should be,Monty Python on the quest for the holy grail,Jason on a quest for the golden Fleece,quests to discover new races/cultures and then to live with them and learn etc etc.

What devs are doing is VERY lazy work,quests do not feel at all like quests but more like errands.Then on that argument,there is nothing wrong with doing an errand or a quest "if acts like a quest"but you do NOT award experience to class skills for doing errands.A Warrior should not be better and more skilled at wielding a sword and shield just because he did 50 errands,those skills and errands should be 100% related to the skills you are awarding xp to.

VERY few developers have ever done it right,most just think designing a mmorpg is create 2500 errands,add a hotbar ,an xp bar,and some instances,i got news for them,you get a 1/10 for that kind of effort or LACK OF.

Neanderthal · February 2018

That whole thing was just a rationalization for designing a game to cater to no-life raiders. Something which the devs of SoL have clearly shown they are obsessed with. And you know what, that's fine, they can make whatever type of game they want.

However, no amount of spin or double talk is going to change the reality of the extremely limited player base it will appeal to. So, yes, you can make whatever type of game you want...but you can't force people to play it.

Renfail · February 2018

Wizardry said:

No it's a terrible way to design a game.

Gated is perhaps the correct term to use but i noticed somebody talking about it the other day in game.Someone in EQ2 said the "title"implies mostly or lot's of questing,to which i can't argue and makes sense.However devs are ALSO adding the title MMO and the title RPG and if your game design deters from either,then your not designing the game properly according to the genre.

So using the cicyle analogy,it is like saying,it is ok to ride a bike,it is ok to follow that linear path or road but if your riding a bike wearing snowshoes and football shoulder pads,your not doing it right and looks way out of place.If your riding that bike with a flat tire,your doing wrong and looks out of place,if the INSIDE content/tires don't have any spokes you won't last long on that ride.

The thing the term "QUEST"really has been diluted badly.We all have an idea of what a quest should be,Monty Python on the quest for the holy grail,Jason on a quest for the golden Fleece,quests to discover new races/cultures and then to live with them and learn etc etc.

What devs are doing is VERY lazy work,quests do not feel at all like quests but more like errands.Then on that argument,there is nothing wrong with doing an errand or a quest "if acts like a quest"but you do NOT award experience to class skills for doing errands.A Warrior should not be better and more skilled at wielding a sword and shield just because he did 50 errands,those skills and errands should be 100% related to the skills you are awarding xp to.

VERY few developers have ever done it right,most just think designing a mmorpg is create 2500 errands,add a hotbar ,an xp bar,and some instances,i got news for them,you get a 1/10 for that kind of effort or LACK OF.

Then it's a very good thing we have zero quest hubs in our game, zero experience points, and zero "quests" in the traditional sense. Instead, we're presenting the players with a massive world where they get to CHOOSE what they do, whether that is explore, craft, adventure, roleplay, dungeon run, hunt down lore, or raid

Po_gg · February 2018

I usually like your design ideas, but this time I'm more on the fence, since gating is a lame method overall... I think it all depends on what you mean by "content".

If you just mean the higher raid tiers, go ahead

the raiding community (each one of the 80-100 of them, as Wildstar presented

) will love it, and the rest of the players won't care the smallest bit. But even there the entry tier should be open to all.
And the bike analogy isn't 100% either, just remember Eddie the Eagle or Eric the Eel

But for anything else beyond raiding (exploration, questing, etc.), artificial gating is a huge no. Just let the players do what they want. If they get to places they are not fitting, they will be squashed anyways. No need for the lukewarm handholding... gating is almost as bad as scaling.

Renfail · February 2018

Neanderthal said:

That whole thing was just a rationalization for designing a game to cater to no-life raiders. Something which the devs of SoL have clearly shown they are obsessed with. And you know what, that's fine, they can make whatever type of game they want.
However, no amount of spin or double talk is going to change the reality of the extremely limited player base it will appeal to. So, yes, you can make whatever type of game you want...but you can't force people to play it.

Except at no point in time have we ever claimed we are designing a game for "no life raiders". In fact, our entire game is designed for players who have 2-3 hour slots of time, just like the development team.

For example, I only play 2 hours per session, Tues - Fri nights. That's a whopping 8 hours of gameplay per week. FAR from "hardcore" or "no life".

Remember...group-based does not = hardcore.

Persistent tracking (such as in EQ2 and WoW) has made it very easy for even the most casual of players to still tackle the most challenging content of the game, on their OWN schedule, without needing to be "no life" or "hardcore.

Renfail · February 2018

Po_gg said:

I usually like your design ideas, but this time I'm more on the fence, since gating is a lame method overall... I think it all depends on what you mean by "content".

If you just mean the higher raid tiers, go ahead the raiding community (each one of the 80-100 of them, as Wildstar presented ) will love it, and the rest of the players won't care the smallest bit. But even there the entry tier should be open to all.
And the bike analogy isn't 100% either, just remember Eddie the Eagle or Eric the Eel

But for anything else beyond raiding (exploration, questing, etc.), artificial gating is a huge no. Just let the players do what they want. If they get to places they are not fitting, they will be squashed anyways. No need for the lukewarm handholding... gating is almost as bad as scaling.

Except, you know, WoW, which still has millions of players and a massive community that still raids full-time

But that's neither here nor there, since the gated content we're talking about in OUR game only represents about 10-15% of the total gameplay that is available to the players, and the entire rest of the game has zero gating. Which you obviously knew, since you read the full blog post and watched the video before making your comment about "for anything else beyond raiding", right?

Renfail · February 2018

SBFord said:

Gotta admit that the "riding bicycles" analogy was a good one. Makes complete sense in MMOs too. Good post.

I typically use the "playing piano or drums or guitar in your spare time versus doing so in a full-time band", but the cycling came to mind due to the Olympics going on right now

thanks!

Foncl · February 2018

DMKano said:

"At no point in time does anything another player has access to impact what you can do in terms of progression or enjoyment of the game."

This is exactly why a PvE game cannot ever be "P2W".

I wish people took time to understand this.

I disagree.

A vast majority of people who are willing to pay for advantages in multiplayer PvE games would never do it in a single player game.

There is a lot of competition between players and status to be had from achieving certain things in multiplayer PvE. There is most definitely a lot of P2W going on in multiplayer PvE games.

Albatroes · February 2018

Some people are actually upset that they wont be allowed access to certain types of content if they dont meet the prerequisites? I guess it ultimately does come down to the prerequisites but it kind of reminds me of something QQ'ing on the FFXIV official forums about not being able to do any boss fight they wanted in a raid just because they were not able to beat them in success, mainly not being able to have access to the ultimate fight until they could beat the final savage boss. Of course every game handles raid content slightly different but the general consensus remains the same: being able to clear previous to prove you can go on. This concept has existed in almost every video game since the beginning. You couldn't get access to the final stage of megaman or mario unless you could clear previous stuff. If you can do it then prove it, simple. Sure it may take a while but compared to previous mmorpgs some of these "gates" are cake walks. If you talk to older generation players, they had to put up with farming a single drop for months at least due to arbitrary stuff like waiting 4-8 hours for a monster to spawn, claiming said monster and then hoping it dropped more than money. Granted I dont agree with stupid gates like what Legion did, tying so much junk to followers just so YOU could progress, but the "I want it now because I paid x" is just entitlement to me. You pay for access to a title at most, not the right to given things just because you want it. Also keep in mind that this title has always been marketed to an older generation, so something like this is to be expected. Just like Pantheon was marketed towards similar individuals and it wont surprise me if they do something similar since they are focusing more on the open-world partying to level approach rather than the quest to level or instance to level approach.

LacedOpium · February 2018

Foncl said:

DMKano said:

"At no point in time does anything another player has access to impact what you can do in terms of progression or enjoyment of the game."

This is exactly why a PvE game cannot ever be "P2W".

I wish people took time to understand this.

I disagree.

A vast majority of people who are willing to pay for advantages in multiplayer PvE games would never do it in a single player game.

There is a lot of competition between players and status to be had from achieving certain things in multiplayer PvE. There is most definitely a lot of P2W going on in multiplayer PvE games.

Your post does not support your disagreement with DMKano's post. The key word in DMkano's post is "impact." The only way that anything another player has access to "impacts" you in terms of YOUR progression or enjoyment of a game, is if YOU allow another player's status and or achievements to affect you in a negative way. That allowance is usually borne out of jealousy and or envy over another person's status and/or achievements.

Jealousy is an emotion; the term generally refers to the thoughts or feelings of insecurity, fear, concern, and envy over relative lack of possessions, status or something of great personal value, particularly in reference to a competitor or comparator.

In other words, you can only lose IF you allow yourself to become jealous and/or envious of another player's status and achievements. When you learn to be satisfied with your own status and achievements, those of which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work while having fun, you will always be a winner.

Renfail · February 2018

LacedOpium said:

Foncl said:

DMKano said:

"At no point in time does anything another player has access to impact what you can do in terms of progression or enjoyment of the game."

This is exactly why a PvE game cannot ever be "P2W".

I wish people took time to understand this.

I disagree.

A vast majority of people who are willing to pay for advantages in multiplayer PvE games would never do it in a single player game.

There is a lot of competition between players and status to be had from achieving certain things in multiplayer PvE. There is most definitely a lot of P2W going on in multiplayer PvE games.

The only way that anything another player has access to "impacts" you in terms of YOUR progression or enjoyment of a game, is if YOU allow another player's status and or achievements to affect you in a negative way. That allowance is usually borne out of jealousy and or envy over another person's status and/or achievements.

Jealousy is an emotion; the term generally refers to the thoughts or feelings of insecurity, fear, concern, and envy over relative lack of possessions, status or something of great personal value, particularly in reference to a competitor or comparator.

In other words, you can only lose IF you allow yourself to become jealous and/or envious of another player's status and achievements. When you learn to be satisfied with your own status and achievements, those of which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work while having fun, you will always be a winner.

This. A million times this

Foncl · February 2018

LacedOpium said:

Your post does not support your disagreement with DMKano's post. The key word in DMkano's post is "impact." The only way that anything another player has access to "impacts" you in terms of YOUR progression or enjoyment of a game, is if YOU allow another player's status and or achievements to affect you in a negative way. That allowance is usually borne out of jealousy and or envy over another person's status and/or achievements.

Jealousy is an emotion; the term generally refers to the thoughts or feelings of insecurity, fear, concern, and envy over relative lack of possessions, status or something of great personal value, particularly in reference to a competitor or comparator.

In other words, you can only lose IF you allow yourself to become jealous and/or envious of another player's status and achievements. When you learn to be satisfied with your own status and achievements, those of which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work while having fun, you will always be a winner.

What you claim to be the key word in DMkano's post, "impact", was a quote from an earlier post. There's nothing in that quote I disagree with and I'm not against gated content either.

He wrote "This is exactly why a PvE game cannot ever be "P2W"" which is what I disagree with.

I find your rant about jealousy and emotion to be ironic as an argument for why a PvE game cannot ever be P2W. Can you explain to me why you want to be able to pay for things in-game instead of earning them? Can't you simply stop being jealous of other players status, possessions as well as achievements and be happy with who you are and what you have achieved in-game without paying for it?

Wellspring · February 2018

DMKano said:

"At no point in time does anything another player has access to impact what you can do in terms of progression or enjoyment of the game."

This is exactly why a PvE game cannot ever be "P2W".

I wish people took time to understand this.

What? A PvE game cannot EVER be P2W?

No matter how much time I've taken, I still don't understand this...

That maybe the case for SoL (it remains to be seen), but there are plenty of PvE games that have contested content.

LacedOpium · February 2018

Foncl said:

LacedOpium said:

Your post does not support your disagreement with DMKano's post. The key word in DMkano's post is "impact." The only way that anything another player has access to "impacts" you in terms of YOUR progression or enjoyment of a game, is if YOU allow another player's status and or achievements to affect you in a negative way. That allowance is usually borne out of jealousy and or envy over another person's status and/or achievements.

Jealousy is an emotion; the term generally refers to the thoughts or feelings of insecurity, fear, concern, and envy over relative lack of possessions, status or something of great personal value, particularly in reference to a competitor or comparator.

In other words, you can only lose IF you allow yourself to become jealous and/or envious of another player's status and achievements. When you learn to be satisfied with your own status and achievements, those of which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work while having fun, you will always be a winner.

What you claim to be the key word in DMkano's post, "impact", was a quote from an earlier post. There's nothing in that quote I disagree with and I'm not against gated content either.

He wrote "This is exactly why a PvE game cannot ever be "P2W"" which is what I disagree with.

I find your rant about jealousy and emotion to be ironic as an argument for why a PvE game cannot ever be P2W. Can you explain to me why you want to be able to pay for things in-game instead of earning them? Can't you simply stop being jealous of other players status, possessions as well as achievements and be happy with who you are and what you have achieved in-game without paying for it?

Regarding, DMKano's "earlier" post, if you agreed with it, why did you quote it in your post and then write in the post comment that you disagreed with it. Had you not done that, I would not have responded in kind.

In response to your question, I have never advocated for wanting to be able to pay for things in-game instead of earning them? As a matter of fact, my post explicit made mention of "being satisfied with your own status and achievements, those of which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work while having fun.

Lastly, my post was far from a rant, and it was not intended as a personal attack on you. It confuses me that you would see it as such instead of seeing it as good and positive sound advice, and a healthy attitude to be employed by all players, while playing a game.

Foncl · February 2018

LacedOpium said:

Regarding, DMKano's "earlier" post, if you agreed with it, why did you quote it in your post and then write in the post comment that you disagreed with it. Had you not done that, I would not have responded in kind.

In response to your question, I have never advocated for wanting to be able to pay for things in-game instead of earning them? As a matter of fact, my post explicit made mention of "being satisfied with your own status and achievements, those of which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work while having fun.

Lastly, my post was far from a rant, and it was not intended as a personal attack on you. It confuses me that you would see it as such instead of seeing it as good and positive sound advice, and a healthy attitude to be employed by all players, while playing a game.

I thought I was clear in my response to DMkano's post regarding what I disagreed with and I clarified even further in my next post exactly what it was I disagreed with.

What exactly do you mean by "which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work"? Do you want to be able to use real world money to buy things in-game or not?

I didn't say that I saw your post as a personal attack. Your arguments simply didn't make much sense to me in reference to the post you quoted.

Neanderthal · February 2018

LacedOpium said:

Foncl said:

DMKano said:

"At no point in time does anything another player has access to impact what you can do in terms of progression or enjoyment of the game."

This is exactly why a PvE game cannot ever be "P2W".

I wish people took time to understand this.

I disagree.

A vast majority of people who are willing to pay for advantages in multiplayer PvE games would never do it in a single player game.

There is a lot of competition between players and status to be had from achieving certain things in multiplayer PvE. There is most definitely a lot of P2W going on in multiplayer PvE games.

Your post does not support your disagreement with DMKano's post. The key word in DMkano's post is "impact." The only way that anything another player has access to "impacts" you in terms of YOUR progression or enjoyment of a game, is if YOU allow another player's status and or achievements to affect you in a negative way. That allowance is usually borne out of jealousy and or envy over another person's status and/or achievements.

Jealousy is an emotion; the term generally refers to the thoughts or feelings of insecurity, fear, concern, and envy over relative lack of possessions, status or something of great personal value, particularly in reference to a competitor or comparator.

In other words, you can only lose IF you allow yourself to become jealous and/or envious of another player's status and achievements. When you learn to be satisfied with your own status and achievements, those of which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work while having fun, you will always be a winner.

LacedOpium, your post misses a very important and fundamental issue. If a person is going to be blocked from progression and locked out of content because the design of the game doesn't fit his/her playstyle or preferences; if the game is designed for a different demographic that he/she isn't a part of; if the game is designed in such a way that he/she will, ultimately, be made to feel jealous----then why would that person want to play that game in the first place?

A lot of the BS that's being shoveled here is people who are in the chosen demographic saying, "hey, we know there aren't enough of us to support a game that favors us so why don't a bunch of you more casual types come and support a game for us even though you'll be treated like shit."

All that crap you wrote basically amounts to <just shut up and play the game and don't bitch when you're treated like a second class citizen and pay your subscriptions fees so we can have fun>. My God, talk about entitlement attitude...some of you people act like other people are obligated to pay to support your entertainment.

MadFrenchie · February 2018

Neanderthal said:

LacedOpium said:

Foncl said:

DMKano said:

"At no point in time does anything another player has access to impact what you can do in terms of progression or enjoyment of the game."

This is exactly why a PvE game cannot ever be "P2W".

I wish people took time to understand this.

I disagree.

A vast majority of people who are willing to pay for advantages in multiplayer PvE games would never do it in a single player game.

There is a lot of competition between players and status to be had from achieving certain things in multiplayer PvE. There is most definitely a lot of P2W going on in multiplayer PvE games.

Your post does not support your disagreement with DMKano's post. The key word in DMkano's post is "impact." The only way that anything another player has access to "impacts" you in terms of YOUR progression or enjoyment of a game, is if YOU allow another player's status and or achievements to affect you in a negative way. That allowance is usually borne out of jealousy and or envy over another person's status and/or achievements.

Jealousy is an emotion; the term generally refers to the thoughts or feelings of insecurity, fear, concern, and envy over relative lack of possessions, status or something of great personal value, particularly in reference to a competitor or comparator.

In other words, you can only lose IF you allow yourself to become jealous and/or envious of another player's status and achievements. When you learn to be satisfied with your own status and achievements, those of which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work while having fun, you will always be a winner.

LacedOpium, your post misses a very important and fundamental issue. If a person is going to be blocked from progression and locked out of content because the design of the game doesn't fit his/her playstyle or preferences; if the game is designed for a different demographic that he/she isn't a part of; if the game is designed in such a way that he/she will, ultimately, be made to feel jealous----then why would that person want to play that game in the first place?
A lot of the BS that's being shoveled here is people who are in the chosen demographic saying, "hey, we know there aren't enough of us to support a game that favors us so why don't a bunch of you more casual types come and support a game for us even though you'll be treated like shit."
All that crap you wrote basically amounts to <just shut up and play the game and don't bitch when you're treated like a second class citizen and pay your subscriptions fees so we can have fun>. My God, talk about entitlement attitude...some of you people act like other people are obligated to pay to support your entertainment.

I wouldn't say that. It's my opinion that the entire genre needs to contract significantly before we see less predatory monetization. Devs are keeping Frankenstein projects going based on monetization techniques designed to exploit whales. Until we can accept that this genre doesn't cater to the same number of gamers that FPSs do, and we allow the cream to rise to the top through the mothballing of mediocre or unoriginal projects, this kind of technique will continue to be used to give life support to projects that otherwise do not have enough appeal to turn a profit in this saturated environment.

Maybe the delays in crowdfunding will work advantage here. But, with the way these games are continually updated and not shut down for sequels, it doesn't take nearly as many releases in this genre to hit saturation as it does in other genres.

Sovrath · February 2018

Neanderthal said:

LacedOpium said:

Foncl said:

DMKano said:

"At no point in time does anything another player has access to impact what you can do in terms of progression or enjoyment of the game."

This is exactly why a PvE game cannot ever be "P2W".

I wish people took time to understand this.

I disagree.

A vast majority of people who are willing to pay for advantages in multiplayer PvE games would never do it in a single player game.

There is a lot of competition between players and status to be had from achieving certain things in multiplayer PvE. There is most definitely a lot of P2W going on in multiplayer PvE games.

Your post does not support your disagreement with DMKano's post. The key word in DMkano's post is "impact." The only way that anything another player has access to "impacts" you in terms of YOUR progression or enjoyment of a game, is if YOU allow another player's status and or achievements to affect you in a negative way. That allowance is usually borne out of jealousy and or envy over another person's status and/or achievements.

Jealousy is an emotion; the term generally refers to the thoughts or feelings of insecurity, fear, concern, and envy over relative lack of possessions, status or something of great personal value, particularly in reference to a competitor or comparator.

In other words, you can only lose IF you allow yourself to become jealous and/or envious of another player's status and achievements. When you learn to be satisfied with your own status and achievements, those of which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work while having fun, you will always be a winner.

LacedOpium, your post misses a very important and fundamental issue. If a person is going to be blocked from progression and locked out of content because the design of the game doesn't fit his/her playstyle or preferences; if the game is designed for a different demographic that he/she isn't a part of; if the game is designed in such a way that he/she will, ultimately, be made to feel jealous----then why would that person want to play that game in the first place?
A lot of the BS that's being shoveled here is people who are in the chosen demographic saying, "hey, we know there aren't enough of us to support a game that favors us so why don't a bunch of you more casual types come and support a game for us even though you'll be treated like shit."
All that crap you wrote basically amounts to <just shut up and play the game and don't bitch when you're treated like a second class citizen and pay your subscriptions fees so we can have fun>. My God, talk about entitlement attitude...some of you people act like other people are obligated to pay to support your entertainment.

Whoa! Where did you get any of that? It's like you made all of that up.

Yes, games should be made for different audiences. Period. Games that are made for multiple audiences really need to get it right or else they fail at everything.

Yes, people who are not part of a targeted demographic should know that and "proceed with caution". I constantly try things that are not made for me. I don't sit there complaining I just know, get something out of it and move on.

No one is saying that people who are not part of that demographic should essentially deal with it yet still play these games. At least from what I can see.

You have basically proven his post.

"My God, talk about entitlement attitude...some of you people act like other people are obligated to pay to support your entertainment."

I'm amazed and wonder where the heck this came from.

LacedOpium · February 2018

Neanderthal said:

LacedOpium said:

Foncl said:

DMKano said:

"At no point in time does anything another player has access to impact what you can do in terms of progression or enjoyment of the game."

This is exactly why a PvE game cannot ever be "P2W".

I wish people took time to understand this.

I disagree.

A vast majority of people who are willing to pay for advantages in multiplayer PvE games would never do it in a single player game.

There is a lot of competition between players and status to be had from achieving certain things in multiplayer PvE. There is most definitely a lot of P2W going on in multiplayer PvE games.

Your post does not support your disagreement with DMKano's post. The key word in DMkano's post is "impact." The only way that anything another player has access to "impacts" you in terms of YOUR progression or enjoyment of a game, is if YOU allow another player's status and or achievements to affect you in a negative way. That allowance is usually borne out of jealousy and or envy over another person's status and/or achievements.

Jealousy is an emotion; the term generally refers to the thoughts or feelings of insecurity, fear, concern, and envy over relative lack of possessions, status or something of great personal value, particularly in reference to a competitor or comparator.

In other words, you can only lose IF you allow yourself to become jealous and/or envious of another player's status and achievements. When you learn to be satisfied with your own status and achievements, those of which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work while having fun, you will always be a winner.

LacedOpium, your post misses a very important and fundamental issue. If a person is going to be blocked from progression and locked out of content because the design of the game doesn't fit his/her playstyle or preferences; if the game is designed for a different demographic that he/she isn't a part of; if the game is designed in such a way that he/she will, ultimately, be made to feel jealous----then why would that person want to play that game in the first place?
A lot of the BS that's being shoveled here is people who are in the chosen demographic saying, "hey, we know there aren't enough of us to support a game that favors us so why don't a bunch of you more casual types come and support a game for us even though you'll be treated like shit."
All that crap you wrote basically amounts to <just shut up and play the game and don't bitch when you're treated like a second class citizen and pay your subscriptions fees so we can have fun>. My God, talk about entitlement attitude...some of you people act like other people are obligated to pay to support your entertainment.

LacedOpium, your post misses a very important and fundamental issue. If a person is going to be blocked from progression and locked out of content because the design of the game doesn't fit his/her playstyle or preferences; if the game is designed for a different demographic that he/she isn't a part of; if the game is designed in such a way that he/she will, ultimately, be made to feel jealous----then why would that person want to play that game in the first place?

You wouldn't. If you ever encounter a game that doesn't support your play style, don't support that game. There are dozens, if not hundred of other games out there. Find one that does support your play style, and support it.

A lot of the BS that's being shoveled here is people who are in the chosen demographic saying, "hey, we know there aren't enough of us to support a game that favors us so why don't a bunch of you more casual types come and support a game for us even though you'll be treated like shit."

Same answer as above. Why would you ever allow that? Move on. Game over. You win.

All that crap you wrote basically amounts to <just shut up and play the game and don't bitch when you're treated like a second class citizen and pay your subscriptions fees so we can have fun>. My God, talk about entitlement attitude...some of you people act like other people are obligated to pay to support your entertainment.

What "all that crap I wrote basically amounts to" is exactly what it says, not what anyone reads into it or assumes it to say. And that is, simply that the only way that anything another player has access to "impacts" you in terms of YOUR progression or enjoyment of a game, is if YOU allow another player's status and or achievements to affect you in a negative way ... And that you can only lose IF you allow yourself to become jealous and/or envious of another player's status and achievements. When you learn to be satisfied with your own status and achievements, those of which you acquired through your own efforts and honest hard work while having fun, you will always be a winner.

It is within you to be able to grasp and execute the above advice. If you are unable to do so, due to inherent characteristic, emotional, or phylosophical reasons ... its on you. Don't blame others for your inability to derive enjoyment because you are constantly looking over your shoulder in an attempt to "keep up with the joneses," or otherwise find happiness due to matters over which you have no control.

MadFrenchie · February 2018

Torval said:

If gating is so great why is it being sold to me? I get gating but it's so rarely done well that when it's being sold my spidey sense starts tingling. My spidey sense is tingling. I get the impression this is a situation I'm not expected to like and then having it reasoned out to me why I really should like the thing I don't.

It could work out well here and be appropriate, but I'm skeptical. It's kind of early to see how it will actually work out so I'll wait to form an opinion on it until I can see how it works.

From what I understand, it's not time-gating, but merely difficulty-gating. Certain encounters won't be manageable until you have reached a certain level of power.

Looked at in that context, it's not much different from the vast majority of RPGs. Most will include areas that are either completely inaccessible or too dangerous to realistically enjoy prior to growing your character. It's basically them saying "hey, we aren't going to scale content directly to you, there will be established power levels of enemies."

Slapshot1188 · February 2018

Not sure I understand the need behind it. What problem does gating solve? Without gating if I’m not strong enough I will simply get squished...

I don’t think you need to make anything easier either. It’s OK to have really tough content that most folks can’t get through.... but what does artificial gating solve?

To me, rather than the bicycle analogy, and in the spirit of the olympics, I see it more like ski trails. There’s the beginner ones and then eventually the super quad black diamond one. If I want to go down that one I’m going to crash horribly... but I don’t need a key from the double black diamond in order to try it...

In the game...Let people go and die... don’t protect them from their own stupidity. Hopefully death has teeth and people learn after their corpse run that maybe they need more training.

1AD7 · February 2018

I don't mind gating in principle but it can be really annoying if it's over done. Time locked gating is probably the worst of all (You need X amount of tokens to unlock something but can only earn X amount of tokens per day.) The worst example of gating I have ever seen in an MMO was with the Shimmering Ring of the Djinn in EQ2. It was an item that randomly dropped from trash mobs that was 100% required to progress through the later tiers of the zone.

Seeing that the zone was instanced and had a lockout that triggered as soon as you killed something, your fate basically revolved around RNG. No amount of preparation, dedication, strategy or anything else mattered. You either acquired the ring by getting lucky with your limited NPC availability or you didn't. The worst part of all is how the ring basically trivialized the later boss encounters. They went from impossible to meh with a single drop. Games should avoid that type of gated progression at all costs.

If you want to gate content go for it but don't force players to rely on luck. If you want to require X amount of tokens, don't limit how many players can acquire per day. The reality is that in some games the players who spend 1 hour per day 7 days a week can meet progression requirements that another player who spends 20 hours on the weekend wouldn't even come close to. That's bad design and makes the game feel like a job.

MadFrenchie · February 2018

Torval said:

MadFrenchie said:

Torval said:

If gating is so great why is it being sold to me? I get gating but it's so rarely done well that when it's being sold my spidey sense starts tingling. My spidey sense is tingling. I get the impression this is a situation I'm not expected to like and then having it reasoned out to me why I really should like the thing I don't.

It could work out well here and be appropriate, but I'm skeptical. It's kind of early to see how it will actually work out so I'll wait to form an opinion on it until I can see how it works.

From what I understand, it's not time-gating, but merely difficulty-gating. Certain encounters won't be manageable until you have reached a certain level of power.

Looked at in that context, it's not much different from the vast majority of RPGs. Most will include areas that are either completely inaccessible or too dangerous to realistically enjoy prior to growing your character. It's basically them saying "hey, we aren't going to scale content directly to you, there will be established power levels of enemies."

Okay, but then why even try and sell me on it. If it's something so common I wouldn't notice, then why point it out? It makes me feel like there is more to the subject. It would like acknowledging any other commonly accepted system and then pointing out that it's not that bad. Why?

Also like Slapshot pointed, what problem is it solving? In a game that doesn't engage in a lot of hand holding why are we suddenly holding hands?

My spidey sense says that gating in online games and mmos is almost universally used to leverage monetization. It's very rare that it isn't connected somehow. How could monetization leverage gating in this instance? It could require sub time to meet the gate requirements. It could be used in a cash shop or as part of a premium subscription perk to lower or soften the gate requirements.

Slapshot's point drills down to the heart of something. If a software system isn't solving a specific problem it shouldn't be there. Is it solving a real problem and if so what is that problem? Or is it solution looking for a good problem to fix? When I first read the article today I wondered why the gate was needed and why is it important that it's explained.

I'm pretty skeptical and dubious about what and if the indie MMO scene will deliver, not just this one, but I'm also fairly open minded about it at the same time. When I see it in place then it will make more sense and I'll form a more solid opinion.

I don't disagree. I'm not sure why the post was made, but it likely has more to do with exposure than anything.

But again, gating by difficulty isn't a new invention by the MMORPG genre, it's been with us for a long time, independent of how that might affect the monetization (singleplayer RPGs, for example, do not benefit in monetization by gating content by difficulty). I really think it's just a traditional RPG design philosophy that, yes, is likely used to monetize MMORPGs in the form of a subscription. However, I would challenge the notion that the idea itself was injected into RPGs in whatever form merely to boost the monetization value.

Generally, it provides a sense of achievement and progression to have areas too dangerous to first explore become navigable once your character has grown in power. So long as that growth in power is done by enjoying and playing the game, I don't see an issue with that. Obviously, anything taken to an extreme would yield undesirable results (such as an unnecessarily tedious grind in a sub game), but the idea in general isn't really tied to monetization at its root.

Howdy, Stranger!

Gated Content in MMOs - With All There is to Do, It's Not a Bad Thing - Saga of Lucimia - MMORPG.com

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Comments

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Gated Content in MMOs - With All There is to Do, It's Not a Bad Thing - Saga of Lucimia - MMORPG.com

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Comments

¯\_(ツ)_/¯