Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 64
  1. #41
    Lesser Hivemind Node
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    979
    Quote Originally Posted by Wheelz View Post
    Worst experience I've had with unlocks would have to go to the recent War of The Roses beta, Where everything is locked away, meaning you can't jump straight into mounted combat or archery, you have to level up first.
    The unlock system is one of the better ones there though. It forces a logical progression on the player so not only does it act like a bit of a tutorial (pretty hard to do otherwise in an online only game) but it also makes sure players have at least some basic ability with say melee combat before they can pick the more advanced melee classes. It's somewhat necessary in a team based game. Otherwise it'd end up like Mount & Blade, where you get some dull battles because half the team think cavalry are an excellent choice to defend castle walls and similar idiocy.

  2. #42
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Drake Sigar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Jolly Ole England
    Posts
    3,202
    Indeed. There have been countless multiplayer modes where I wished players were forced to undergo a tutorial before being thrust into competitive multiplayer situation which required them to ask me to explain tactics, weapons, objectives, and in general what in the blue hell is going on. Even in games with both single player campaigns and a multiplayer mode, it's not unheard of for players to skip the campaign and move straight to the multiplayer with zero experience under their belt.

    People asked me how to shoot in Left 4 Dead.
    Last edited by Drake Sigar; 03-10-2012 at 12:03 AM.

  3. #43
    Network Hub MD!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by soldant View Post
    The style of game is outdated. Picking up weapons and powerups leads mostly to camping those areas and clusters everyone in small parts of the map in practice.
    Nonono. A well-designed Quake map does exactly the opposite. The items are laid out in such a way that you need to move around the map and control different areas at different times. In fact, the items are exactly what makes camping a bad idea. You're camping the Red Armour? Okay, I just picked up every other item on the map, and I know when the RA is going to spawn, so I'm coming to take it and/or frag you now. When there are four important pickups spawning at 25-35 second intervals, not to mention weapons and ammo, plus major powerups if we're talking about team modes, it is the attempt to control them that makes the game tactically interesting.

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Swayze View Post
    I wish we could get back to the quake/unreal days of just lots of maps and a hefty dose of skill
    Quake never went away :)
    http://www.quakelive.com/

  4. #44
    Network Hub Chaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Gloucester, UK
    Posts
    319
    Quote Originally Posted by MeltdownInteractiveMedia View Post
    What sort of MMORPG would you play if you don't like the grinding?
    Not a Korean one.

  5. #45
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Jesus_Phish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    4,241
    I wonder if you took team DM out of CoD would the player base drop off rapidly. TDM in that game, and other games like it, reward people with no skill for being on a good team. Because everyone plays as John Rambo, the winners are ultimately the side with the best John Rambo(s). So I can be terrible at the game, but because I sneak up on a few guys and get some kills and then some guy whose amazing happens to be on my team, I win. It's a false sense of achievement.

    Its why I think sports like football shouldn't be in the olympics. You could have such good defenders that the goalie doesn't have to do anything and if you win the goalie still gets a medal.

  6. #46
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Heliocentric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    9,381
    Cod4 used to have small groups of clanners who would get lmgs and "shoot through wall" perks and spawn camp through concrete.

    Yeah... I could do without that kind of teamwork.
    I'm failing to writing a blog, specifically about playing games the wrong way
    http://playingitwrong.wordpress.com/

  7. #47
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Jesus_Phish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    4,241
    That's just bad game design though.

  8. #48
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Heliocentric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    9,381
    Quote Originally Posted by Jesus_Phish View Post
    That's just bad game design though.
    TBH, shooting through cover was an excellent features, the "bad game design" was small maps and procedural spawming that means the opposing team can decide where you spawn by standing near the other spawns, also small maps.

    Yeah.... I hate CoD games because the maps are too tiny, make them 16 times bigger and I'd eat that stuff up.
    I'm failing to writing a blog, specifically about playing games the wrong way
    http://playingitwrong.wordpress.com/

  9. #49
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Jesus_Phish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    4,241
    Quote Originally Posted by Heliocentric View Post
    TBH, shooting through cover was an excellent features, the "bad game design" was small maps and procedural spawming that means the opposing team can decide where you spawn by standing near the other spawns, also small maps.

    Yeah.... I hate CoD games because the maps are too tiny, make them 16 times bigger and I'd eat that stuff up.
    Agreed, I remember seeing a video before of one of the cods, not sure which, where two guys on a clan team ended up on a silly amount of kills because they had figured out with their team how to force the opponents to spawn in one location. So while most of the team camps the spawn points to force them into this place, another stands nearby with a knife and another sprays the location from a helicopter kill streak.

  10. #50
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Hypernetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,154
    Big maps can be boring sometimes though. Walking for 10 minutes to get to the action isn't exactly exciting.

  11. #51
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Heliocentric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    9,381
    Quote Originally Posted by Hypernetic View Post
    Big maps can be boring sometimes though. Walking for 10 minutes to get to the action isn't exactly exciting.
    Big maps are an opportunity for the designer, them wasting the opportunity is a totally different problem.

    Why not use halo style one way man catapults, or plentiful vehicles. But while walking is an option? The space matters.
    I'm failing to writing a blog, specifically about playing games the wrong way
    http://playingitwrong.wordpress.com/

  12. #52
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Hypernetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Heliocentric View Post
    Big maps are an opportunity for the designer, them wasting the opportunity is a totally different problem.

    Why not use halo style one way man catapults, or plentiful vehicles. But while walking is an option? The space matters.
    Which is why I said "sometimes".

  13. #53
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    110
    Persistency and a sense of achievement ARE extremely important in competitive online games. You need to get something beyond simply the "you win" or "you lose" screen to make it seem worthwhile, especially when you're just starting out and don't know how the game works very well yet. However, unlock systems like CoD are the wrong way to do this. I quickly lost interest in CoD because winning and losing felt irrelevant. All of the skill was individual, yet winning and losing was measured per team; it made no sense. I played for a while, liked it for a while (MW 2 if anyone's wondering which), got a bunch of unlocks, but logging back on to play felt like grinding in an MMO, but without the promise of cool stuff at the level cap. It's the reason I've stopped trying to level in GW2; there's nothing waiting for me there but more of the same. If you want to use unlocks to motivate, they need to be things that are really cool and unique, and which change the game fundamentally, such as champions in League of Legends. But that alone just isn't enough. You need to also have some sense of achievement for victories, and sense of responsibility for losses. Sure, not everyone needs this, but I think that a lot of players do. I play games to win. That doesn't mean I'm super hardcore, or that I rage, or even that I don't have fun when I lose. But fundamentally, when I play games (RPGs and their ilk being a major exception), I do everything in my power to win the game (fairly, mind you). I like being good at games, I like improving at games, and I like the thrill of competition. Put me in a high-pressure situation where the outcome of something important rests on me, and I'm happy, even if I fail. For me to enjoy a game, I have to feel like those moments matter. I need to feel like the game is a competition between some number of groups, under some known constraints and working towards some known goal. And in a game where you just hop on, play for a while, and leave, I don't get that. It's why I haven't done that much of Planetside 2. Basically, a game needs to be designed to make it clear to players that their goal is to win the game. Don't reward players for things that aren't related to winning, and definitely don't tie any sort of progression system to anything except time played and whether you won or lost.

  14. #54
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus soldant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Terra Australis Incognita
    Posts
    4,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Ritashi View Post
    Persistency and a sense of achievement ARE extremely important in competitive online games. You need to get something beyond simply the "you win" or "you lose" screen to make it seem worthwhile, especially when you're just starting out and don't know how the game works very well yet.
    Thing is most online games don't lend themselves to progression. Each match tends to be self-contained and really, pretty much everything in gaming progression means a grand total of "absolutely nothing" at the end of the day. I don't know what sort of progression you can have which is really meaningful and doesn't result in CoD-style issues. I didn't play LoL extensively so I can't comment on that, but TF2's items (for the most part) being mostly sidegrades or (pointlessly?) cosmetic allow for variety and for a sense of progression without fundamentally changing the game - the really different weapons offer different playstyles which don't necessarily give an inherent advantage. Then again some of them do, some are straight upgrades from stock weapons, but nevermind that.

    The issue with the TF2 system is that they've made it entirely arbitrary. Back when things started you'd get weapons for completing achievements. Now you get them whenever the item servers decide to give them to you. There's no achievement or real progression there. But if it went back to achievements (including some for team play and not just individual success) with the same sort of items you'd give people a bit of progression without screwing up the game.

    Fundamental changes to reward progression, if done incorrectly, just creates an artificial advantage which destroys the playing field and is made worse by further player skill progression.

  15. #55
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Hypernetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,154
    Quote Originally Posted by soldant View Post
    Thing is most online games don't lend themselves to progression. Each match tends to be self-contained and really, pretty much everything in gaming progression means a grand total of "absolutely nothing" at the end of the day. I don't know what sort of progression you can have which is really meaningful and doesn't result in CoD-style issues. I didn't play LoL extensively so I can't comment on that, but TF2's items (for the most part) being mostly sidegrades or (pointlessly?) cosmetic allow for variety and for a sense of progression without fundamentally changing the game - the really different weapons offer different playstyles which don't necessarily give an inherent advantage. Then again some of them do, some are straight upgrades from stock weapons, but nevermind that.

    The issue with the TF2 system is that they've made it entirely arbitrary. Back when things started you'd get weapons for completing achievements. Now you get them whenever the item servers decide to give them to you. There's no achievement or real progression there. But if it went back to achievements (including some for team play and not just individual success) with the same sort of items you'd give people a bit of progression without screwing up the game.

    Fundamental changes to reward progression, if done incorrectly, just creates an artificial advantage which destroys the playing field and is made worse by further player skill progression.
    I think TF2 actually has a really cool player progression system, if you can call it that. I'm not talking about items, but those little popups you might not have seen in a long time if you are a veteran player. The ones that would pop up and say something like "You killed more enemies that life than your previous best" or "You did more healing that round than your previous best" and it would show the number of kills or whatever statistic it was recording on the screen. Those little popups are a pretty cool way of rewarding a player and giving them a sense of accomplishment without actually giving them an item or some other form of unlock. The popups even create a positive feedback loop in the form of challenging the player to continue beating his best scores by getting more kills, living longer, completing objectives, and whatever else. I wish more games had that.


    side rant:

    There is progression in the form of rankings, but that doesn't really work so well in most team games. LoL has an Elo system for ranking, but it's hardly an accurate evaluation of an individuals skill. Your Elo in solo queue LoL is based on your wins and losses, nothing more. When your win/loss ratio is largely dependent on your 4 teammates your Elo can be skewed greatly beyond what it should be (in either direction). Not to mention there are people who make "troll accounts" in LoL to play ranked and throw games on purpose by intentionally feeding and other such business just to ruin other people's day, but that's a topic for another day.

    /side rant.
    Last edited by Hypernetic; 04-10-2012 at 07:19 AM.

  16. #56
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    781
    Imagine if completing an objective adds +x amount of kills to your score tally and moreover, players on the other team actually die. So, for example, capture the bunker = 5 players on the other team get vaporized. You get to see it, kill cam and everything, with an appropriate in-game explanation. I'm sure those hunter-gatherer lone wolf types would be dying to complete the objective then. Would be even cooler if the player who completes the objective gets to control the fragging. So maybe he could be put into the cockpit of a missile defense system, or maybe he gets put into a machine gun hauling mech that is locked into a room with squishy human baddies from the other team. I'm sure there are methods that aren't so contrived to reward attaining team objectives involving mass murder that pampers the ego with +x to the scoreboard next to your name.

  17. #57
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Hypernetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,154
    Quote Originally Posted by hamster View Post
    Imagine if completing an objective adds +x amount of kills to your score tally and moreover, players on the other team actually die. So, for example, capture the bunker = 5 players on the other team get vaporized. You get to see it, kill cam and everything, with an appropriate in-game explanation. I'm sure those hunter-gatherer lone wolf types would be dying to complete the objective then. Would be even cooler if the player who completes the objective gets to control the fragging. So maybe he could be put into the cockpit of a missile defense system, or maybe he gets put into a machine gun hauling mech that is locked into a room with squishy human baddies from the other team. I'm sure there are methods that aren't so contrived to reward attaining team objectives involving mass murder that pampers the ego with +x to the scoreboard next to your name.
    Oh god I can see it now. People screaming various racial slurs at each other for stealing "THEIR" objective and getting the bonus kills thing you described. It would be funny.

  18. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by hamster View Post
    I'm sure there are methods that aren't so contrived to reward attaining team objectives involving mass murder that pampers the ego with +x to the scoreboard next to your name.
    If someone lonewolves with a positive K/D and yet it doesn't help his team that's a problem with game mechanics. If I kill someone in BF2142 that puts him out of the game for fifteen seconds, and possibly much more depending on his respawn options.

  19. #59
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Hypernetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Mohorovicic View Post
    If someone lonewolves with a positive K/D and yet it doesn't help his team that's a problem with game mechanics. If I kill someone in BF2142 that puts him out of the game for fifteen seconds, and possibly much more depending on his respawn options.
    It's not necessarily a problem with game mechanics. More often than not it's just an imbalance in the two teams' skill levels. For instance I can run around as spy in TF2 and maintain a pretty decent KDR and even take out sentry nests, teleporters, and medics along the way, but if my team is garbage we aren't going to win. In a small game (say nothing over 6v6 or so) one lone wolf can definitely carry his team. When it's 12v12 or 16v16? Not really. I mean, you definitely CAN carry the team, but not if the enemy team is completely stacked with skilled players and your team is full of noobs, it's just not going to happen.

  20. #60
    Lesser Hivemind Node airtekh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by soldant View Post
    The issue with the TF2 system is that they've made it entirely arbitrary. Back when things started you'd get weapons for completing achievements. Now you get them whenever the item servers decide to give them to you. There's no achievement or real progression there. But if it went back to achievements (including some for team play and not just individual success) with the same sort of items you'd give people a bit of progression without screwing up the game.
    You can still get items for completing achievements, in addition to random item drops.

    The two systems run concurrently.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •