Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sinij

30 minutes gameplay

Recommended Posts

A few points:

 

  • The OP has a valid point. 
  • I too, would like to be able to play short sessions sometimes.
  • I imagine they are already plans to accommodate this, as Todd has also commented on the plight of the lack of time the aging gamer has. In fact, that has been named as part of the motivation for passive training. So that players that don't always have the hours to put in, don't fall so far behind those that do.
  • I think that there will be plenty to do in even short play sessions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Porting in into a wrong place, in the middle of an enrmy group for example can hold plenty of risk and danger.

Yet that risk is rather boring. Doesnt really have any strategical value and is very boring and annoying for the victim army. Its basically camping on the spawn isnt it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet that risk is rather boring. Doesnt really have any strategical value and is very boring and annoying for the victim army. Its basically camping on the spawn isnt it?

Well it's fun in a gambling type of way. It also adds another decision point, risk and go though the portal or spend more time run around knowing that the portal is likely to be camped. Or send in somebody to check the portal first, and follow is he lives. And stuff like that.

Edited by rajah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's fun in a gambling type of way. It also adds another decision point, risk and go though the portal or run around knowing that it is likely to be camped.

Or you can remove the fast travel and make people deep-strategize over the path enemy army would follow, scout the enviorenment, plan on traps. Opposed to gambling? 

 

There are , in my opinion , a simpler and funnier way of handling the "travel" problem.

 

Following mechanic could fix it ;

Lets consider a horse , that can move 300km/h

 

Following calculation determines the speed of the horse. InventoryWeight / TotalCarryingCapacity * HorseSpeed.

(So it will move slower dependant on amount of items you carry)

 

And if  InventoryWeight / TotalCarryingCapacity calculation's result is smaller then 0.4

for every 30 seconds you spend moving on horse, horses speed will increase by 50 , up to maximum of 2 * HorseSpeed.

 

So basically if you are traveling long and safe distance, since horse's speed increases as you travel, it will actually be quite fast, but this also prevents people from just mounting and running away from ganks and such.

 

This also requires some kind of dismounting mechanic to ensure players can still gank other players that are on horses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, the devs don't NEED to do produce anything than their vision of a PvP sandbox MMO that we all backed.  It's purely up to you on whether this vision will fit your gaming style and restrictions.

 

There will be guilds that require #/hours per night/week in order to participate in the primary CW group.  There will also be guilds that don't have any requirements, "just jump online and help us with this objective".

 

The developers are not going to frame the sandbox to fit everyone's gaming time restrictions.  For you, it's 30-45 minutes... for another, it's 1-2 hours... for another, it's all day... for another, it's 15-30 minutes.  You get my point here, in that it's not up to the developers of any game to fit every gamer's style and time restrictions.  That's really your responsibility to decide what you'd like to do with  your 30-45 minutes of entertainment time.

 

It may very well be, that CF isn't for you due to the large scale strategic PvP that will be going on in CWs.  You really have no authority to issue demands to any developer. You only have control over your own person and the time you invest/spend.

 

I'm not demanding anything of the developer nor am I asking them to fit the game to my specifications.  I backed the game because I like their vision for the game.  What I'm saying is simply that it is necessary for the developers to sit down and understand how their player-base intends to play the game and for how long.  

 

It's imperative for them to estimate and accommodate what they consider a reasonable minimum amount of time that players should put in to have fun or contribute in some significant way.  They also should understand how to keep a player invested for incredibly long amounts of time.  Following that, it's also important to understand how a player will play from that short interval through to the long session and for it to flow well.  

 

We all want to game to succeed (I think) and there are many many examples of successful games and quite a few of those have found a good minimum play session of 30 min to one hour.  Crowfall doesn't necessarily have to use that amount of time as their minimum but there should be great consideration around what the developers deem as their minimum.


Screen_Shot_2015_09_13_at_3_04_43_PM.png

Check us out here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people will know where the PVP hotspots are within a campaign if they want to jump into the action quick. The more mechanics the devs add, the more restricted the game will feel. Mechanics to help people with limited time shouldn't be implemented, there will be more cons than pros.


☆ We are in a positive posting drought, so just post. Be the change you want the forums to be. Go wild. Just follow your positive posting star. ☆
☆:*´¨`*:.•.¸¸.•´¯`•.♥.•´¯`•.¸¸.•..:*´¨`*:.☆

(¯`’•.¸*♫♪♥(✿◠‿◠)♥♫♪*¸.•’´¯) Member of the Pro-ACE Club (¯`’•.¸*♫♪♥(✿◠‿◠)♥♫♪*¸.•’´¯)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not demanding anything of the developer nor am I asking them to fit the game to my specifications.  I backed the game because I like their vision for the game.  What I'm saying is simply that it is necessary for the developers to sit down and understand how their player-base intends to play the game and for how long.  

 

It's imperative for them to estimate and accommodate what they consider a reasonable minimum amount of time that players should put in to have fun or contribute in some significant way.  They also should understand how to keep a player invested for incredibly long amounts of time.  Following that, it's also important to understand how a player will play from that short interval through to the long session and for it to flow well.  

 

We all want to game to succeed (I think) and there are many many examples of successful games and quite a few of those have found a good minimum play session of 30 min to one hour.  Crowfall doesn't necessarily have to use that amount of time as their minimum but there should be great consideration around what the developers deem as their minimum.

I disagree on some part.

 

Developers shouldnt really consider "how many hours our player base will play this game per day". or "how we can make this game fun for 30 munites of gameplay time". What they should do, is focusing on creating the world as they are imagining. They must forsake all such real-life questions so they can create that "thing" which drove us all into this game. 

If they force themselves into "making it fun for 30 munites gametype" they will just forget their actual aims and dreams. This, after all, is a sandbox game. Where players themselves make the content. Whether one can have fun in 30 munites or not, is all dependant on players themselves. In fact answer of this question might even vary from one campaign to another. Implementing mechanics to ensure there is something to do in 30 munites can cause big problems in meta-game and vision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or you can remove the fast travel and make people deep-strategize over the path enemy army would follow, scout the enviorenment, plan on traps. Opposed to gambling? 

 

There are , in my opinion , a simpler and funnier way of handling the "travel" problem.

 

Following mechanic could fix it ;

Lets consider a horse , that can move 300km/h

 

Following calculation determines the speed of the horse. InventoryWeight / TotalCarryingCapacity * HorseSpeed.

(So it will move slower dependant on amount of items you carry)

 

And if  InventoryWeight / TotalCarryingCapacity calculation's result is smaller then 0.4

for every 30 seconds you spend moving on horse, horses speed will increase by 50 , up to maximum of 2 * HorseSpeed.

 

So basically if you are traveling long and safe distance, since horse's speed increases as you travel, it will actually be quite fast, but this also prevents people from just mounting and running away from ganks and such.

 

This also requires some kind of dismounting mechanic to ensure players can still gank other players that are on horses.

Well whatever, but it's still a type of "slow" fast travel :P. I just do not really enjoy the idea of having to sit and stare at monitor for 20 minutes as I run to Spiderqueen Mines, only to find them empty.

 

From my point of view a system of gates or recall runes ala UO would be more preferrable.

 

Or maybe it could be a combination of both. Very limited amount of gates from which you will have to travel to the local POI on a horse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well whatever, but it's still a type of "slow" fast travel :P. I just do not really enjoy the idea of having to sit and stare at monitor for 20 minutes as I run to Spiderqueen Mines, only to find them empty.

 

From my point of view a system of gates or recall runes ala UO would be more preferrable.

 

Or maybe it could be a combination of both. Very limited amount of gates from which you will have to travel to the local POI on a horse.

Well, im aganist "teleporting". I dont really care even if it takes 5 munites to travel from one end of world to another, as long as you are actually moving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, im aganist "teleporting". I dont really care even if it takes 5 munites to travel from one end of world to another, as long as you are actually moving.

It's a prejudice. Travelling is getting from point A to point B. Does not really matter whether it's teleporting, flying or running, Imo. It has to serve the purpose of getting you around the game map fast enough, so you can spend those precious 30 minutes you have actually playing.

Edited by rajah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so my take on this may be a bit odd but here we go.

It's a sandbox game - emergent gameplay.  On the downside that means that it's not in the core structure of the game for you to have a guaranteed PvP experience that you find meaningful within a certain timeframe.  If the devs build that then they're shooting themselves/sandbox emergent selves in the foot.

 

On the upside it's a sandbox game with emergent gameplay!  If it's PvP you're after then join a Dreg's campaign and keep yourself close to a POI.  When you login there will either be folks defending the POI, attacking it, or you can take it over if no one's there and taunt everyone to come bite you.  If you want PvP then just be smart about where you login and out.  Yes, I know, don't logout so close that when you login you're a snackcake but fights will be happening around the mines, the embargo bank vaults, the resource POI's and around the major structures that players build.  If you login and no one is near Guild Wanderlost's castle then infiltrate it!  Logout in an out of the way area and then login next time you have a half an hour and kill kill kill them from behind when they least expect it!  Rawrrrr!

There are so many things other than PvP that can be done in 30 minutes but if it's PvP you're after then get into a PvP FFA campaign and just find the right spot where fighting happens often naturally within the game.  Hang out there and you're good to go.


pixS8Wt.jpg


The Chronicles of Crowfall           The Free Lands of Azure            RIP Doc Gonzo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not demanding anything of the developer nor am I asking them to fit the game to my specifications.  I backed the game because I like their vision for the game.  What I'm saying is simply that it is necessary for the developers to sit down and understand how their player-base intends to play the game and for how long.  

 

It's imperative for them to estimate and accommodate what they consider a reasonable minimum amount of time that players should put in to have fun or contribute in some significant way.  They also should understand how to keep a player invested for incredibly long amounts of time.  Following that, it's also important to understand how a player will play from that short interval through to the long session and for it to flow well.  

 

We all want to game to succeed (I think) and there are many many examples of successful games and quite a few of those have found a good minimum play session of 30 min to one hour.  Crowfall doesn't necessarily have to use that amount of time as their minimum but there should be great consideration around what the developers deem as their minimum.

 

When you use absolute words like "NEED" and "imperative".... you're pretty stating that you KNOW best and are demanding action from the developers.  You are entitled to your opinions, but that's where you're entitlement ends.  Feel free to suggest or recommend possible solutions to a valid problem.  I just strongly recommend that you select the right word to convey your meaning.

 

That said, this is a PvP sandbox, which ultimately means that Ace is providing the box, the sand, a simple ruleset defining a winning objective, and minimal tools and toys to achieve the objective.  The rest, is 100% up to the players.  Once Ace starts holding the hands of players, the more the sandbox starts turning into sectioned off and more linear gameplay, which is destructive to the very nature of a strategic PvP sandbox.


> Suddenly, a Nyt appears in the discussion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so my take on this may be a bit odd but here we go.

It's a sandbox game - emergent gameplay. On the downside that means that it's not in the core structure of the game for you to have a guaranteed PvP experience that you find meaningful within a certain timeframe. If the devs build that then they're shooting themselves/sandbox emergent selves in the foot.

 

On the upside it's a sandbox game with emergent gameplay! If it's PvP you're after then join a Dreg's campaign and keep yourself close to a POI. When you login there will either be folks defending the POI, attacking it, or you can take it over if no one's there and taunt everyone to come bite you. If you want PvP then just be smart about where you login and out. Yes, I know, don't logout so close that when you login you're a snackcake but fights will be happening around the mines, the embargo bank vaults, the resource POI's and around the major structures that players build. If you login and no one is near Guild Wanderlost's castle then infiltrate it! Logout in an out of the way area and then login next time you have a half an hour and kill kill kill them from behind when they least expect it! Rawrrrr!

There are so many things other than PvP that can be done in 30 minutes but if it's PvP you're after then get into a PvP FFA campaign and just find the right spot where fighting happens often naturally within the game. Hang out there and you're good to go.

We are talking about a FFA campaign, well at least I am. The thing is that even in FFA you are very likely to have a stationary residence. Be it your guilds fort, a house or whatever, the relatively safe spot. This is how it was in about every other PvP game I have played. The goal is to get fro your "residence" to the known PvP hotspots and possibly cycle through them fast enough, when you have limited time.

And logging out in the wilderness in the middle of a battle or near it, with all the stuff and lewtz on you is not a very good idea in general.

Edited by rajah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people will know where the PVP hotspots are within a campaign if they want to jump into the action quick. The more mechanics the devs add, the more restricted the game will feel. Mechanics to help people with limited time shouldn't be implemented, there will be more cons than pros.

 

So why don't the devs give us some Eve-esque map filters to help us find our own PvP; "Players killed in last 24 hours", "Combats started in last 60m", "Number of players in last 24h", "Number of players in last 60m", "Number of mobs killed in last 24h", "Number of mobs killed in last 60m", and so forth.

 

Crowfall is all about giving us the tools to make our own fun; If I've got this overlay I can put on the map to show me how 'hot' a given area is, then I don't need anything else to find someone to murder.

Edited by Psyentific

Hardcore gamer & tabletop enthusiast. Enjoys roleplaying, pretending to be stupid, and one-sided fun.

Goodposting 101: How to Keep the Forums Clean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why don't the devs give us some Eve-esque map filters to help us find our own PvP; "Players killed in last 24 hours", "Combats started in last 60m", "Number of players in last 24h", "Number of players in last 60m", "Number of mobs killed in last 24h", "Number of mobs killed in last 60m", and so forth.

 

Crowfall is all about giving us the tools to make our own fun; If I've got this overlay I can put on the map to show me how 'hot' a given area is, then I don't need anything else to find someone to murder.

 

Because you're wanting a handicap for something that players can do on their own.  Guilds will have scouts/scout groups that will relay this information back to those leading the guild op.

 

I have a problem with this new generation of CoD gamers that feel entitled to instant gratification combat.  They want/demand developers to provide a means to be dropped in the middle of a hot zone and start fighting.  They don't care about large scale strategy and tactics, they would rather arena-like battles that they can immediately teleport into.  SOE listened to this type of group and gutted out the sandbox in PlanetSide 2 and replaced it with linear gameplay that focuses most players into zerg-vs-zerg battles.  

 

I'd rather not see this happen in CF, especially when there are MANY other games out there to facilitate the CoD mentality.  This takes us back to... if you only have 30-45 minutes to kill and expect combat during that entire time, perhaps CF isn't for you.  


> Suddenly, a Nyt appears in the discussion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you use absolute words like "NEED" and "imperative".... you're pretty stating that you KNOW best and are demanding action from the developers.  You are entitled to your opinions, but that's where you're entitlement ends.  Feel free to suggest or recommend possible solutions to a valid problem.  I just strongly recommend that you select the right word to convey your meaning.

 

That said, this is a PvP sandbox, which ultimately means that Ace is providing the box, the sand, a simple ruleset defining a winning objective, and minimal tools and toys to achieve the objective.  The rest, is 100% up to the players.  Once Ace starts holding the hands of players, the more the sandbox starts turning into sectioned off and more linear gameplay, which is destructive to the very nature of a strategic PvP sandbox.

 

I'm not entirely sure where the linear game play hand holding mention came from so I'm not going to address that portion of your post.  

 

You are right that I could use weaker language.  I could say that if ACE wants the game to be good and to make them money so that they can continue to make a living and more importantly make this game to their vision, they should probably take into consideration how their core player base plays the game.  

 

This is not my opinion.  This is how games become successful.  

 

The developers need a good concept (check), they need to understand who they are making the game for (check), they need to understand what a play session looks like from the average player (what is being discussed), and they need actually produce fun game play and mechanics (fingers crossed).  And let me clarify 'average player' by saying the average player within ACE's target demographic. 

 

Now THIS is my opinion.  I imagine their target audience is 16-35 males.  I think that's who would be most interested in a game like that (there will obviously be exceptions).  If you look at that range its really clear that most of those people probably do stuff other than play games, for example working.  This is where the "they need to understand what a play session looks like from the average player" comes in to the equation.  

 

From my own experience (24 years of age, full time job, girlfriend, pets), I don't have any time to play in the morning nor can I play for the ten hours from 9am-7pm.  Then, I like to spend time with my girlfriend and take care of my pets.  Now I have like 30 min to two hours to play something.  

 

What I am not saying is that the developers NEED to change their sandbox concept into something different or add a feature to cater to me.  What I am saying is that there is a probability that a majority of the average players lead a similar life style (give or take some time).  As such ACE NEEDS (yes, needs) to be incredibly considerate of the amount of time their players will spend on average playing their game and develop a good experience around what ACE determines is a minimum play time.

Edited by Siegnir

Screen_Shot_2015_09_13_at_3_04_43_PM.png

Check us out here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have a problem with this new generation of CoD gamers that feel entitled to instant gratification combat.  They want/demand developers to provide a means to be dropped in the middle of a hot zone and start fighting.  They don't care about large scale strategy and tactics, they would rather arena-like battles that they can immediately teleport into.  SOE listened to this type of group and gutted out the sandbox in PlanetSide 2 and replaced it with linear gameplay that focuses most players into zerg-vs-zerg battles.  

 

 

This has nothing to do with CoD, I am basing myself on my UO experience back from 1997/1998

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...