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

First Look: Confessor Powers - Official discussion thread

Recommended Posts

Oh no! Don't use education Siegnir!

 

 

This is an understandable misunderstanding, but there are more targeting methods than the miniscule index of examples we can reference from MMOs.

 

Oh Vikingnail, here's another phrase to look up, "argument of authority". Claiming knowledge without even qualifying yourself instead of even being able to describe a subject isn't proof, it's evasion.

 

What do you think I'm misunderstanding? They said, "If we find it is too difficult to play ranged, we have a few systems we may need to add or augment, like ‘sticky’ targets, ranged assist or some manner of soft locking system." Which is exactly what I said because those things will most likely, if not certainly, make ranged exceptionally easy to play and are not fun.

 

In tera, the sorcerer class has a skill called Void Pulse, you press whatever key it's bound to and off it goes. This used to be a very difficult skill to land on mobile targets because it was very, very slow, but they increased the projectile speed and it became a bit easier. By increasing the speed they were able to maintain the manual aim play of the skill while making it easier instead of using a targeting/locking system. What's even better? Players with half a brain learned to play with it in ways that made up for its downsides. It has a range of 21/22m, I used it most often about 3-8m away from the target because it was possible to make up for its slow speed, by decreasing the distance it has to travel. Before the speed was buffed a common sorcerer combo (mostly for dueling) involved sleeping a target, standing at specific range, casting void pulse, and then casting fireblast (aoe ~12m in front of the sorc) which resulted in both abilities damaging your target at the same time.

 

For physical ranged (bows...) attacks in Crowfall, I would expect the projectiles to move pretty custard fast.


gCWxS8u.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Promote your interst as you like, you'll have to escape binary generalizations in order to make an impactful argument.

You should look up the definition of circular logic

In your hubris you actually imagine that I'm unaware of the most common references

...

But I don't have an abundance of time to educate you

Oh Vikingnail, here's another phrase to look up, "argument of authority".

 

Bahamutkaiser, there are productive and positive ways to suggest that your conversation partners are not arguing their cases as effectively as they might. These comments are not representative of those ways, and serve only to discourage people from wanting to engage with your arguments at all.

 

You may find that you can make your points more effectively, to both the devs and the community, if you do so without casting everyone who disagrees with you as mentally deficient.


Official "Bad Person" of Crowfall

"I think 1/3rd of my postcount is telling people that we aren't turning into a PvE / casual / broad audience game." -

Tully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have 7 minutes and 43 second to spare it is really worth watching, I promise.

---> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea6UuRTjkKs

 

I enjoyed the video, however I think most of what is discussed in it applies more to PvE / solo games than PvP games.

 

I find this part interesting : "Your goal as a designer is to get your players so invested, so engaged, that they want to beat this game, even though it's difficult. You don't want to simply set something before them that cause them to walk away because they hit a challenge that was just too tough, too early. That's just punishing. It is very easy to make a punishing game ; it is quite challenging to get your players through a difficult one."

Edited by courant101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ode to the Confessor

 

Isky pisky lemon pie
flames of death falling from the sky
Confessors in pajamas are gonna hate
They'll scream on the forums until they get plate
 
Over powered and under nerfed
They can lock you down and make you hurt
You can never kill 'em as the devs smile and wink
Then they jump on the forums to say you stink
 
In sieges you need them to melt the gate
Cause no other classes will ever rate
So hocus pocus methane gas 
As fireballs leap from my a$$
 
 
sorry it's late, and the drama was getting thick :)
 
 
nite nite
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bahamutkaiser, there are productive and positive ways to suggest that your conversation partners are not arguing their cases as effectively as they might. These comments are not representative of those ways, and serve only to discourage people from wanting to engage with your arguments at all.

 

You may find that you can make your points more effectively, to both the devs and the community, if you do so without casting everyone who disagrees with you as mentally deficient.

To be quite contextual, those are mostly responses to people who have discarded logic and decided to be obstinate or bigoted about their opinion, and I slam their selfishness with a complete dismissal.

 

They had very thoughtful and practical explanations to exchange, and they decided to be deliberately ignorant. So I'm not interested in talking to them.

 

Beyond that, sharp articulation identifying exactly what's wrong with your opinion almost instantly is your fault, I'm very considerate and helpful to people who are promoting positive and respectful conversation. When you come out sloppy making several false claims and dismissing perfectly valid interests, you don't get to turn around and play victim when a stronger observation and better description corrects your logic. I don't discriminate either, I don't care if we agreed, or are friends, or if your a developer, I will challenge fallacy, indecency and to a smaller extent, disappointment when anyone fails, with the severity or pragmatism appropriate for the situation.

 

Well, most of the time, I can be a little toothy when I'm on a role >.>

Edited by bahamutkaiser

a52d4a0d-044f-44ff-8a10-ccc31bfa2d87.jpg          Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes... Than if they're upset, they'll be a mile away, and barefoot :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bahamutkaiser, there are productive and positive ways to suggest that your conversation partners are not arguing their cases as effectively as they might. These comments are not representative of those ways, and serve only to discourage people from wanting to engage with your arguments at all.

 

You may find that you can make your points more effectively, to both the devs and the community, if you do so without casting everyone who disagrees with you as mentally deficient.

Such heated discussions! Good for development though, I'm sure they listen. I think bahamut is really, really funny actually. I'm sure he's just joking and overplaying the 'sounding super smart' bit. I wouldn't take it to heart so much Jihan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such heated discussions! Good for development though, I'm sure they listen. I think bahamut is really, really funny actually. I'm sure he's just joking and overplaying the 'sounding super smart' bit. I wouldn't take it to heart so much Jihan.

 

Nope. He's smart and almost always come up with genius ideas. I suggest you to read some of his threads he created.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be quite contextual, those are responses to people who have discarded logic and decided to be obstinate or bigoted about their opinion, and I slam their selfishness with a complete dismissal.

 

Sounds more like your own behavior than anyone elses...

and they decided to be deliberately ignorant. I'm not interested in talking to them.

 

Sounds again like your behavior. 

 

Beyond that, sharp articulation identifying exactly what's wrong with your opinion almost instantly is your fault, I'm very considerate and helpful to people who are promoting positive and respectful conversation. When you come out sloppy making several false claims and dismissing perfectly valid interests, you don't get to turn around and play victim when a stronger observation and better description corrects your logic. I don't discriminate either, I don't care if we agree, or are friends, or if your a developer, I will challenge fallacy, indecency and to a smaller extent, disappointment when anyone fails, with the severity or pragmatism appropriate for the situation.

 

You have been less than sincere in the 2 biggest threads related to this update.  You still have not addressed a single point people have actually made who have an opposing view to your own, you just pretty much sit there going "nuh uh that's binary".  Then you resort to calling people deluded or ignorant or obstinate. 

Well, most of the time, I can be a little toothy when I'm on a role >.>

 

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you think I'm misunderstanding? They said, "If we find it is too difficult to play ranged, we have a few systems we may need to add or augment, like ‘sticky’ targets, ranged assist or some manner of soft locking system." Which is exactly what I said because those things will most likely, if not certainly, make ranged exceptionally easy to play and are not fun.

 

In tera, the sorcerer class has a skill called Void Pulse, you press whatever key it's bound to and off it goes. This used to be a very difficult skill to land on mobile targets because it was very, very slow, but they increased the projectile speed and it became a bit easier. By increasing the speed they were able to maintain the manual aim play of the skill while making it easier instead of using a targeting/locking system. What's even better? Players with half a brain learned to play with it in ways that made up for its downsides. It has a range of 21/22m, I used it most often about 3-8m away from the target because it was possible to make up for its slow speed, by decreasing the distance it has to travel. Before the speed was buffed a common sorcerer combo (mostly for dueling) involved sleeping a target, standing at specific range, casting void pulse, and then casting fireblast (aoe ~12m in front of the sorc) which resulted in both abilities damaging your target at the same time.

 

For physical ranged (bows...) attacks in Crowfall, I would expect the projectiles to move pretty custard fast.

 

Ranged assist and so on encompass a great deal of options outside of what you may be familiar with. Just because most MMOs and Computer games only display certain types of targeting and gameplay doesn't mean that there aren't other methods in other kinds of games, systems outside of games, and undiscovered ones.

 

I'm not going to be unrealistic and promise you that they are going to use one. My money is on something kinda simple, probably drawn from the same index of computer game examples you think they'll use. If they can get a mostly manual system which works right, I hope they use it, despite what it might sound like, I'm not against it, I only have a problem with the way entitlements are being submitted. But I also think there are a lot of practical limitations which make mostly manual targeting problematic. Despite all this discussion about projectiles, the Confessor themselves will likely need very little target assistance anyway, their mostly lobbing explosives and geometric area attacks from what they described.

 

When the Ranger and Stalker, or bow using kits are developed, than it's going to get into serious usability scenarios.

 

How are they going to

1: make a targeting system which has a fair amount of difficulty in comparison to melee opponents along with features like animation locking and clustered targets in large battles and so on.

2: honor expectations for friendly fire.

3. interact with complex environments, which you don't really see in many of these action MMOs.

and 4: still be fun for a satisfactory demographic of players.

 

I'm sure I'm skipping obligations, but those are things they pretty much need to make happen, and they have to make it happen in a complex physics model, how much physics do you see in those other action games?, ACE is actually pioneering some impressive stuff. Even those shooter games fail to apply a lot of physics, your not getting thrown around when you get hit by bullets as long as your alive in most games, A marine told me about a bullet he took in the leg, he said an AK bullet hit him in the leg bone, since it caught on his bone (shattering it) he flipped in the air 3 times before landing on his face, and of course, he wasn't dead when it happened. Realistically, with proper physics, super fast projectiles have a lot of stopping power, you don't make crack shots while taking lead.

 

My mind is wandering. Anyway, trying to make their objectives work with a manual system is an option, they never gave anyone a commitment to it, and anyone who said otherwise deluded themselves. You can want it, you can ask for it, you can take in the factors and context of the game and try to explain how it can work, but they don't owe it, and it's not mandatory to make a fun game, being chauvinistic about it won't solve anything. I wish we could all get what we want... I have an idea about how we can all get what we want >.> But I don't make the game, and making a game is a lot more about labor than thought. I'd like to suggest though that the game doesn't have to be exactly what you think it should be to be fun. I'm really good at speculating ways to alter games, but I've played plenty of games which did things differently than I would have, and are still very fun to play. I'm really irritated that they aren't committed to making Fae fly in this game, it p!sses me off, but that doesn't mean the game can't be fun because Fae don't fly... it just means I'm disappointed that Fae don't freakin fly :(

 

Please make Fae fly ACE, everyone wants Fae to fly that way they can shoot me down with manual aiming :P

Edited by bahamutkaiser

a52d4a0d-044f-44ff-8a10-ccc31bfa2d87.jpg          Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes... Than if they're upset, they'll be a mile away, and barefoot :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 "Your goal as a designer is to get your players so invested, so engaged, that they want to beat this game, even though it's difficult. You don't want to simply set something before them that cause them to walk away because they hit a challenge that was just too tough, too early. That's just punishing. It is very easy to make a punishing game ; it is quite challenging to get your players through a difficult one."

I love that quote courant thanks for sharing it.

 

The thing that really matters when looking and considering that statement though, is which gamers the devs are looking at.  In CF there is the most diverse group of "gamers"  that probably has ever been enmassed.  Everything from no mechanical skill at all ( turn based combat, I KNOW you have seen goatload!)  to and extremely high level of skill.   They have to figure out where exactly they want to place the bar of 'difficult"   Because too difficult for some maybe ridiculously easy for others.  The only thing I can hope for is that in testing there is a good "mix"  of ppl that paid for Alpha testing and that it isn't slanted one way or the other.  


Maybe it not about the happy ending. Maybe it's about the story.

RIP Doc Gonzo "to anyone...speak your mind...defend your position...be prepared for an Argument and enjoy the process of the discussion...that's all part of any good Forum experience"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love that quote courant thanks for sharing it.

 

The thing that really matters when looking and considering that statement though, is which gamers the devs are looking at.  In CF there is the most diverse group of "gamers"  that probably has ever been enmassed.  Everything from no mechanical skill at all ( turn based combat, I KNOW you have seen goatload!)  to and extremely high level of skill.   They have to figure out where exactly they want to place the bar of 'difficult"   Because too difficult for some maybe ridiculously easy for others.  The only thing I can hope for is that in testing there is a good "mix"  of ppl that paid for Alpha testing and that it isn't slanted one way or the other.  

This is why people need to experience the mainstream pvp games, to get a firm understanding of what the majority of pvpers are experiencing, and what "average" level play looks like.  That average level of play is a good reference point for how difficult they should make their game.  Easy to learn hard to master and all that jazz. 

 

Should a freshly born confessor be landing every single one of their casts?  90%?  10%?  Should there be a learning curve for landing your spells more consistently? 

 

EQN/Landmark pvp is a great example to use because it was and still is in a similar stage of development really.  It is an action combat game and when it initially implemented combat, players were very mobile and fast, it was too hard and very rudimentary with 6 total abilities and no armor... but people kept playing it because even the ones that weren't good at it had something to work towards, something to strive for, a goal to improve and get better.  However, because many of the players had come from an old tab target game, they were very frustrated with the combat, it was challenging and they didn't want to have to improve, they were used to being considered good at their old games, and now they were starting fresh again and that caused frustration.  So SOE decided to swing it in the other direction, make combat as slow as possible.  This flat out killed the PvP... it became too easy, people didn't have anything to strive for anymore, got bored, and never logged on again. 

 

For a game that is focused primarily on PvP, you want to attract gamers that strive for competition, want to get better and better, want to improve themselves.  You do not want people that will crumble at the first serious obstacle, claiming it to be unbeatable, or even worse making some invalid excuse for why they can't beat it and then eventually quitting.  PvP is built around that competitive drive and striving to be the best.

 

You start making a game too easy, and the best players get bored, they leave, and then the rest of the players slowly leave, because without the best players they don't get to be wowed and amazed and see top level play, and no longer have anyone inspiring to gun for. 

 

This is why games with low pvp skill ceilings just generally don't last in online pc gaming. 

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ranged assist and so on encompass a great deal of options outside of what you may be familiar with. Just because most MMOs and Computer games only display certain types of targeting and gameplay doesn't mean that there aren't other methods in other kinds of games, systems outside of games, and undiscovered ones.

 

I'm not going to be unrealistic and promise you that they are going to use one. My money is on something kinda simple, probably drawn from the same index of computer game examples you think they'll use. If they can get a mostly manual system which works right, I hope they use it, despite what it might sound like, I'm not against it, I only have a problem with the way entitlements are being submitted. But I also think there are a lot of practical limitations which make mostly manual targeting problematic. Despite all this discussion about projectiles, the Confessor themselves will likely need very little target assistance anyway, their mostly lobbing explosives and geometric area attacks from what they described.

 

When the Ranger and Stalker, or bow using kits are developed, than it's going to get into serious usability scenarios.

 

How are they going to

1: make a targeting system which has a fair amount of difficulty in comparison to melee opponents along with features like animation locking and clustered targets in large battles and so on.

2: honor expectations for friendly fire.

3. interact with complex environments, which you don't really see in many of these action MMOs.

and 4: still be fun for a satisfactory demographic of players.

 

I'm sure I'm skipping obligations, but those are things they pretty much need to make happen, and they have to make it happen in a complex physics model, how much physics do you see in those other action games?, they are actually pioneering some impressive stuff. Even those shooter games fail to apply a lot of physics, your not getting thrown around when you get hit by bullets as long as your alive in most games, A marine told me about a bullet he took in the leg, he said an AK bullet hit him in the leg bone, since it caught on his bone (shattering it) he flipped in the air 3 times before landing on his face, and of course, he wasn't dead when it happened, realistically, with proper physics, super fast projectiles have a lot of stopping power, you don't make crack shots while taking lead.

 

My mind is wandering. Anyway, trying to make their objectives work with a manual system is an option, they never gave anyone a commitment to it, and anyone who said otherwise deluded themselves. You can want it, you can ask for it, you can take in the factors and context of the game and try to explain how it can work, but they don't owe it, and it's not mandatory to make a fun game, being chauvinistic about it won't solve anything. I wish we could all get what we want... I have an idea about how we can all get what we want >.> But I don't make the game, and making a game is a lot more about labor than thought. I'd like to suggest though that the game doesn't have to be exactly what you think it should be to be fun. I'm really good at speculating ways to alter games, but I've played plenty of games which did things differently than I would have, and are still very fun to play. I'm really irritated that they aren't committed to making Fae fly in this game, it p!sses me off, but that doesn't mean the game can't be fun because Fae don't fly... it just means I'm disappointed that Fae don't freakin fly :(

 

Please make Fae fly ACE, everyone wants Fae to fly that way they can shoot me down with manual aiming :P

 

Yea I'm hoping there's at least one promotion (among confessor, frostweaver, druid) that will avoid the easier targeting systems.

 

Physical ranged will be what it is most important for, I hope they can test it sooner than later.

 

In that case I suppose it can still be fun, but if they go into developing the ranged combat with the mindset that abilities need to be easy to land, I don't think I can have fun. I played ESO, healer first (was ok), then I made a magic based and physical based ranged character and it was so unbelievably simple. Like going to the target range with a scoped rifle and setting the target up at 10m...


gCWxS8u.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed the video, however I think most of what is discussed in it applies more to PvE / solo games than PvP games.

 

I find this part interesting : "Your goal as a designer is to get your players so invested, so engaged, that they want to beat this game, even though it's difficult. You don't want to simply set something before them that cause them to walk away because they hit a challenge that was just too tough, too early. That's just punishing. It is very easy to make a punishing game ; it is quite challenging to get your players through a difficult one."

 

I think it applies pretty well to mechanics within any type of game.  And I loved that part as well; the reason I brought this video up is because making a punishing game is probably the worst of the two evils possible (too easy vs. too punishing).  Too easy at least creates for a large audience even if the experience as a whole is less fun.  Where as punishing is unplayable for any audience.


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 it applies pretty well to mechanics within any type of game.  And I loved that part as well; the reason I brought this video up is because making a punishing game is probably the worst of the two evils possible (too easy vs. too punishing).  Too easy at least creates for a large audience even if the experience as a whole is less fun.  Where as punishing is unplayable for any audience.

The philosophy actually doesn't apply very well to pvp games... there are many more variables at that point, because players are the real obstacle, and if you try to tune them to be too easy, you essentially are limiting them, and they get disinterested because they feel a heavyhanded developer influence on the skill ceiling. 


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I'm hoping there's at least one promotion (among confessor, frostweaver, druid) that will avoid the easier targeting systems.

 

Physical ranged will be what it is most important for, I hope they can test it sooner than later.

 

In that case I suppose it can still be fun, but if they go into developing the ranged combat with the mindset that abilities need to be easy to land, I don't think I can have fun. I played ESO, healer first (was ok), then I made a magic based and physical based ranged character and it was so unbelievably simple. Like going to the target range with a scoped rifle and setting the target up at 10m...

 

Personally, I want more strategic behaviors and limitations which allow greater emergent behaviors, like 100 meter down range shots (not game meters), and interactive attacks like a fighting game, which means slower projectiles which the recipient can see coming and manual block, along with friendly fire. Those things don't go very well with manual aiming. Shooting a projectile that only goes as fast as a race car over a large distance with an arc trajectory is not something most of the manual aiming club are thinking about when they fantasize about Crowfall manual aim.

 

I also don't think it works with the super man Knight and dash back and forth until your run out of stamina Confessor. The archetype selection itself and distribution of shields isn't going to work with a realistic archery model either, their not even planning a block for every archetype thus far. I often feel like two or more separate visions for the game features are colliding with some of the intended features and statements they make. It's like all that strategy talk at the beginning of their campaign... Wildstar Telegraphs >.> 5 concept photos of Fae with wings... oh, they don't fly. I'm really questioning whether friendly fire and strategy are even going to be a reality at this point, because it feels more like their making a super hero hack and slash with these power sets... maybe it'll be fun, but it sounds nothing like the tune originally set by the initial marketing material.


a52d4a0d-044f-44ff-8a10-ccc31bfa2d87.jpg          Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes... Than if they're upset, they'll be a mile away, and barefoot :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The only thing I can hope for is that in testing there is a good "mix"  of ppl that paid for Alpha testing and that it isn't slanted one way or the other.

 

Just another reminder to everyone still seeing it this way...Alpha is for ideas and Beta is for balance.

 

No need to be scared about something that doesn't even apply ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it applies pretty well to mechanics within any type of game.  And I loved that part as well; the reason I brought this video up is because making a punishing game is probably the worst of the two evils possible (too easy vs. too punishing).  Too easy at least creates for a large audience even if the experience as a whole is less fun.  Where as punishing is unplayable for any audience.

Please the All Father, NOT too easy.  I hate to say it , but I kinda agree w/ VN on this one.  A game that is NOT challenging is not interesting at least to me.  I don't want to play a game with a bunch of players that are fighting who is the KING and top tier in a game that anyone can excel at.  Where is the risk and reward in that?  With challenging mechanics the risk is losing , but with effort the reward is getting better.  And then perhaps being better than better.  :)


Maybe it not about the happy ending. Maybe it's about the story.

RIP Doc Gonzo "to anyone...speak your mind...defend your position...be prepared for an Argument and enjoy the process of the discussion...that's all part of any good Forum experience"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please the All Father, NOT too easy.  I hate to say it , but I kinda agree w/ VN on this one.  A game that is NOT challenging is not interesting at least to me.  I don't want to play a game with a bunch of players that are fighting who is the KING and top tier in a game that anyone can excel at.  Where is the risk and reward in that?  With challenging mechanics the risk is losing , but with effort the reward is getting better.  And then perhaps being better than better.   :)

I think one of the valuable qualities of an MMO with unique archetypes is that you can have certain classes which have wildly different play styles, from dodgy reactive melee fighters, to sharp accurate ranged and even easy simple supports. It would be nice if the variety of play mechanisms for each archetype allowed for different people to play the same game and find a role that's comfortable for them. The problem is that the difficulty to impact of each role still has to be fair.

 

With significant emphasis on crafting and support, there's clearly room for a player to greatly contribute without even fighting, like a dwarf who builds castles and siege equipment, and stacked all crafting disciplines so they can help their guild win without even engaging in battle. There could be similarly difficult yet very differently operated combat classes too, like a Fae which has extreme maneuverability vs a Ranger with a crack shot. Whether that's an option?


a52d4a0d-044f-44ff-8a10-ccc31bfa2d87.jpg          Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes... Than if they're upset, they'll be a mile away, and barefoot :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please the All Father, NOT too easy.  I hate to say it , but I kinda agree w/ VN on this one.  A game that is NOT challenging is not interesting at least to me.  I don't want to play a game with a bunch of players that are fighting who is the KING and top tier in a game that anyone can excel at.  Where is the risk and reward in that?  With challenging mechanics the risk is losing , but with effort the reward is getting better.  And then perhaps being better than better.   :)

It isn't gratifying at all to beat someone if you knew it took no skill or very little skill to do so... but unfortunately there are SOME types of gamers that do like being big fish in little ponds...

 

A few years from now I don't want to be looking back at crowfall and saying, "ah it had potential"... i'd rather be looking at it and going "yes they did it right, this is the undisputed best pvp mmo. "

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The philosophy actually doesn't apply very well to pvp games... there are many more variables at that point, because players are the real obstacle, and if you try to tune them to be too easy, you essentially are limiting them, and they get disinterested because they feel a heavyhanded developer influence on the skill ceiling. 

 

I'm going to have to stand by my statement that it really does apply even in a PvP game.  If a mechanic in a PvP game is punishing to the player (unreasonable difficulty to accomplish the intended task) then it shouldn't be put into the game.  Players should be the real obstacle, I agree with this strongly, and that obstacle shouldn't be obscured by punishing mechanics.

 

Please the All Father, NOT too easy.  I hate to say it , but I kinda agree w/ VN on this one.  A game that is NOT challenging is not interesting at least to me.  I don't want to play a game with a bunch of players that are fighting who is the KING and top tier in a game that anyone can excel at.  Where is the risk and reward in that?  With challenging mechanics the risk is losing , but with effort the reward is getting better.  And then perhaps being better than better.   :)

 

I'm not against challenging mechanics.  I'm actually really hoping they figure out manual aim to feel fun and viable.  But I can understand if through the many iterations they do that ranged combat just feels overwhelmingly awful for a majority of players that they might have to make shooting magical fire balls a little easier.


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

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...