Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Planet Explorers Released!

Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]  (Read 6262 times)

PrometheusVI

  • Citizen
  • ****
  • Karma: 11
  • Posts: 427
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #15 on: March 19, 2015, 07:27:21 AM »

There was a similar discussion about beeing able to shop from every point.
Devs said, some of those casual features are for testing purpose. At a certain point of colony stability, the general shop was removed and now you have npcs sell stuff. Will also happen to the scanner upgrades in adventure mode.
The revive and fast travel, i dont know if they stay in the game, but like MirecU salready said: At this stage, revival shots and fast travel are needed (insta death due to bug, or beeing stuck somewhere)
Logged

yarnevk

  • Andhera Rider
  • Planetary Hero
  • ******
  • Karma: 51
  • Posts: 2297
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #16 on: March 19, 2015, 03:23:49 PM »

As others have already said you do not design a game around bugs.  Saving often is the very easy workaround to dying to a bug, it does not require fast travel or revival shots to solve.  Those features are in the game for the very reason of casualization, not because the game is buggy.  There is no need to remove those features once the game is not buggy, but many are insisting they do not want those features in their game and they must be optional scenario editor.
Logged

Lily

  • Citizen
  • ****
  • Karma: 11
  • Posts: 379
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #17 on: March 19, 2015, 03:41:30 PM »


further more, when you make the bug kill you and a revival shot "fixes" this people may not see this bug annoying enough to coem to the forum and meantion it. So bugs need to annoy people to make them "unhappy" enough to report them. because hardly any alpha or beta testers are actually testing a game, instead they just play it as it were a released version.
Logged

Luminaire

  • Global Moderator
  • Citizen
  • *****
  • Karma: 34
  • Posts: 466
  • Dream Deity
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #18 on: March 20, 2015, 02:49:48 PM »


further more, when you make the bug kill you and a revival shot "fixes" this people may not see this bug annoying enough to coem to the forum and meantion it. So bugs need to annoy people to make them "unhappy" enough to report them. because hardly any alpha or beta testers are actually testing a game, instead they just play it as it were a released version.

^this....

I go through this with a lot of people who ask for work-around features like console commands and cheats, and use bugs as their justification. And i say the same thing... "Then people would just use that as a workaround instead of contributing to get the annoying issue fixed." Too many people do not see early access as a developement stage, and just want to play the game. Which.. isn't necessarily wrong, but it's non-constructive to the developement side of Early Access.  It's also rather silly to expect the devs to code a workaround when they could alternatively just.. you know.. fix the bug..
Logged

Dynseth

  • Enlistee
  • *
  • Karma: 0
  • Posts: 8
  • Within our minds, we intertwine!
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #19 on: March 20, 2015, 04:16:01 PM »


further more, when you make the bug kill you and a revival shot "fixes" this people may not see this bug annoying enough to come to the forum and meantion it. So bugs need to annoy people to make them "unhappy" enough to report them. because hardly any alpha or beta testers are actually testing a game, instead they just play it as it were a released version.

^ In agreement for this and many other statements from Lily.

Let me state I am one of those "No risk, no rewards." kind of guy, I started with NES and felt great joy from Mario at the fact of you could jump to the end with low extra lives and risk it all, or play through most of the game getting resources along the way to help beat the end with a bit of challenge. Yes I did own a game genie back then but did not use it all that often except for super jump to add a learning curve to the game. Other games I adored were things such as dragon warrior where you would walk across the bridge too early and loose half your gold from the impending doom that followed being risky.

Another game great for this was Gothic I for the PC, it was AMAZING how everything responded to you even for still being a simple game, such as you pick a fight with a person they would rob/ put a sword in your chest, to now and days and like Dragon Warrior if you walked out too far it would be a death sentence. At leas this game had save anywhere so yeah some of the risk went out bu everyone knows if you get TOO deep into what you are doing and forget to save thus the risk.

Now why this is relevant, I also keep in mind that there are gamers like my wife who love PWI and Forsake World with a LOT! of hand holding. What I feel solves this is how you set up the game in the beginning for solo play. have it where you CAN do what you will for auto travel, easy resources, etc. and then have options to take it away to fit he challenge for those like me where they like their face to be melted off for one wrong mistake due to risk/miscalculation.

On the MMO side though it is easy to do the same with two simple words... Different Servers. set up some servers to let people enjoy the freedom of easy casual play and then another number for those who like challenge, I mean with things like setting towns up with defenses and people to work the fields there is not much risk for being under attack/food rotting away.

As for death where you can just keep reviving and no risk involved, maybe do what other have done and take resources like Dragon Warrior and Gothic I have done. You are after all fighting animals to aliens so the animals would eat things like meat and plants and the aliens could take things such as ammo and almost everything else. thus why the time comes important for they will rob you and run and now you have to hunt them down to get it back. As for the animals they just eat the meat and plants with no chance of reclaim.

I know this runs risk of balancing issues and time on two war fronts not to mention money but then you get to do what you wish, Keep entertainment for the challenge seekers and keep the casuals. I mean if the numbers are what you want then this is the best way to get the best of both worlds, there is a price for every choice in this world bu now and days I feel too many are trying to make quick money off of THOUSANDS! Of casual games out there and the number of true challenging games are getting harder to find in my opinion.
Logged
Cold hearted orb that rules the night. Removes the colors from our sight. Red is grey and yellow white.
But we decide which is right. And what is an illusion?

Trent

  • Settler
  • ***
  • Karma: 20
  • Posts: 249
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #20 on: March 20, 2015, 05:42:59 PM »

I am amazed that the devs of every open world game I've seen so far have missed one very important aspect of the worlds they are creating.

These open worlds are so big, there is room for both casual and hardcore experiences.

If a player wants to stick to newbie valley, stepping out only to complete quests given by NPCs, that is entirely their business. In an open world game, newbie valley can be big enough to contain plenty of game for casual players.

Now if a player wants to plant his or her flag on the peak of Mt. Pain, that would be an entirely different experience. As long as the rewards are suitable, more hardcore players will take up the challenge. The rewards don't have to be huge material advantages either. Cosmetic or vanity rewards would work just as well.  And, yes, Mt. Pain is a PVP area.

Beyond that, there is room for players to set their own goals.  Do I stick to my little settlement in newbie valley or do I try to bring the world under my heel?
Logged

Dynseth

  • Enlistee
  • *
  • Karma: 0
  • Posts: 8
  • Within our minds, we intertwine!
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #21 on: March 20, 2015, 06:45:05 PM »

I am amazed that the devs of every open world game I've seen so far have missed one very important aspect of the worlds they are creating.

These open worlds are so big, there is room for both casual and hardcore experiences.

If a player wants to stick to newbie valley, stepping out only to complete quests given by NPCs, that is entirely their business. In an open world game, newbie valley can be big enough to contain plenty of game for casual players.

Now if a player wants to plant his or her flag on the peak of Mt. Pain, that would be an entirely different experience. As long as the rewards are suitable, more hardcore players will take up the challenge. The rewards don't have to be huge material advantages either. Cosmetic or vanity rewards would work just as well.  And, yes, Mt. Pain is a PVP area.

Beyond that, there is room for players to set their own goals.  Do I stick to my little settlement in newbie valley or do I try to bring the world under my heel?

Exactly, I mean in WoW and many other old MMOs, isn't that the reasoning behind dungeons/raids? you get rewards based off of cooperation, but I know myself I could solo to 80 off quests and grinding.
Logged
Cold hearted orb that rules the night. Removes the colors from our sight. Red is grey and yellow white.
But we decide which is right. And what is an illusion?

yarnevk

  • Andhera Rider
  • Planetary Hero
  • ******
  • Karma: 51
  • Posts: 2297
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #22 on: March 21, 2015, 02:01:58 AM »

One problem with the multiverse idea is that big MMOs have to cede control of their game to individual server administrators, yet they are all trying to brag about their megaserver technologies that have everyone playing the same game rules. ESO was the worst offender for this they had every opportunity to have multiverse servers to satisfy those who want to play with different styles that are incompatible, all they needed to look at was the Skyrim mods to know that people play ES differently.

Yet all they wanted to brag about how many was online on one server at the same time.   Seems the only ones left playing was people that really should get their own room - last time I logged in I had to listen to a lizard and cat 'polishing' their spears in front of the fire... if you get more players by keeping ERP away from RP away from PD away from PVP - by all means let everyone have their own experience with like minded people.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2015, 02:04:47 AM by yarnevk »
Logged

Dynseth

  • Enlistee
  • *
  • Karma: 0
  • Posts: 8
  • Within our minds, we intertwine!
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #23 on: March 21, 2015, 12:57:47 PM »

Yeah I see your point Yarnevk and I did not say it was easy thus why I quoted Trent with his statement of worlds so big you can avoid the things you do not care for leaving the rest to those that do. Like myself I find RP servers fun but hate being in PvP situations.

I brought this all up due to yes many in the past have abused the multi-server by not paying attention/ it was tiresome to keep everyone happy, thus why I said it was not really cost effective. It is due to these things I did end up agree with rent about having such a large world, have the land itself be the dividing line between risk takers going to lands more dangerous while others can still enjoy the game in a more hospitable environment. I do not mind a long trek for a challenge and many old games I adored made you walk EVERYWHERE! lol
Logged
Cold hearted orb that rules the night. Removes the colors from our sight. Red is grey and yellow white.
But we decide which is right. And what is an illusion?

yarnevk

  • Andhera Rider
  • Planetary Hero
  • ******
  • Karma: 51
  • Posts: 2297
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #24 on: March 21, 2015, 03:51:02 PM »

dividing lands can also be done with ruleset changes, it can just be more confusing to players - get your character deleted because you was not paying attention by wandering into the PD area.  Works better with physical seperation via islands or portals, so that there is clear acknowledgement the rule set is changing, actually they are different servers with different rules, they just have appearance of world continuity.  Then you need timeout rules about PVP escaping to RP areas., or crafter zones not being able to import goods into a PVP survival area.

But even area division causes player problems, again ESO the PVP players had Cyrodil as their map with their own rules, but they want the entire world to be able to claim RP types that did not agree to play by those rules.
Logged

Luminaire

  • Global Moderator
  • Citizen
  • *****
  • Karma: 34
  • Posts: 466
  • Dream Deity
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #25 on: March 22, 2015, 05:00:34 AM »

I am amazed that the devs of every open world game I've seen so far have missed one very important aspect of the worlds they are creating.

These open worlds are so big, there is room for both casual and hardcore experiences.

If a player wants to stick to newbie valley, stepping out only to complete quests given by NPCs, that is entirely their business. In an open world game, newbie valley can be big enough to contain plenty of game for casual players.

Now if a player wants to plant his or her flag on the peak of Mt. Pain, that would be an entirely different experience. As long as the rewards are suitable, more hardcore players will take up the challenge. The rewards don't have to be huge material advantages either. Cosmetic or vanity rewards would work just as well.  And, yes, Mt. Pain is a PVP area.

Beyond that, there is room for players to set their own goals.  Do I stick to my little settlement in newbie valley or do I try to bring the world under my heel?
This actually doesn't work. D3 was a good example of why. Because even if you present challenges as special areas, they are all still considered "a part of the game, and must be experiencable!" by everyone.. D3 when released had 4 different difficulty settings. Normal, Nightmare, Hell, and an additional mode named Inferno. Inferno was for the truly hardcore players that liked a difficulty, and it lived up to that VERY well. it was damn near impossible.. But everyone complained.. why? Because it was difficult and they felt obligated to complete every element of the game without challenge and resistence. Even though it was meant for the more challenge oriented people, others simply couldn't leave it at that. Having other areas that don't fit the casual gameplay in a game that has casual gameplay angers people. It was so bad on D3 that they redid the entire difficulty settings design to make it all one playthrough with your option to change the difficulty settings on the fly, rather than having them as seperate modes that you unlock one by one in different game playthroughs.

Having different areas in the game that cater towards super challenges will just spurr people complaining that the area is OP and needs to be "nurfed".
« Last Edit: March 22, 2015, 05:02:25 AM by Luminaire »
Logged

yarnevk

  • Andhera Rider
  • Planetary Hero
  • ******
  • Karma: 51
  • Posts: 2297
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #26 on: March 22, 2015, 04:09:00 PM »

Indeed witness the ESO forum posts of RP saying they are denied the experience of Cyrodil because they did not PVP, but them wanting to revisit the setting of Oblivion is not enough incentive for PVP like the devs stupidly thought.

Likewise the forum posts from PVP frothing at the mouth over the Justice system, when they realize that is not turned out to be open world PVP, that they are required to PVE the world to get good at PVP.  Likewise the dumbing down (and future removal) of VR in ESO, it was always intended to be a challenge for elite to take a year to get to 'end-game' with the devs a quarterly step ahead of them.   

What happened is the elite MMO end gamers finished the new content in a month, and the casuals complained they was unable to do it in a month but they was the only ones still playing, so it got dumbed down so they could get to new content and devs even added if you stay offline you got catchup points so you could keep up with your friends. 

With the new system there will not even be anymore rankings, just slightly different perk sidegrades, but just wait the free players will complain they cannot achieve all the perks, and just like godmode in skryim you will be able to get all the perks (even if you bought them in the store rather than grinded them out)

It is why I think the MMOS need to cede control to the multiverse admins.  If you do not like the risk vs. reward rules on this server, then go play on your own casual copy of the world and get your gold stars on the fridge over there. (what is what Steam 'acheivements' actually are)  That seperation means the casuals have enough sense to stay away from the PVP and PD servers, plus the devs can evaluate the popularity of server types and add features accordingly (unlike Wurm Online where PVP servers are the least populated, but every update is new PVP features)
« Last Edit: March 22, 2015, 04:22:54 PM by yarnevk »
Logged

Trent

  • Settler
  • ***
  • Karma: 20
  • Posts: 249
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #27 on: March 22, 2015, 06:30:01 PM »

People certainly do complain when they are denied an easy route to some sort of content - even when being difficult to obtain makes that content what it is.  ;D

The Eve Online devs have made it work and Ill paraphrase their take on the issue when I say "They'll get over it" 

Eve managed to pull this off with a large but static world. When the game's world can be near infinite the casuals need not even see the hardcore regions if they don't want to.

But they can still go there whenever they feel up to the challenge and hardcore players can retreat to the casual regions when they need a break - something that cant be done if the game's world is pure casual or pure hardcore.

Letting different servers set the rules could work, especially where player worlds are concerned.
Logged

Luminaire

  • Global Moderator
  • Citizen
  • *****
  • Karma: 34
  • Posts: 466
  • Dream Deity
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #28 on: March 22, 2015, 09:13:14 PM »

People certainly do complain when they are denied an easy route to some sort of content - even when being difficult to obtain makes that content what it is.  ;D

The Eve Online devs have made it work and Ill paraphrase their take on the issue when I say "They'll get over it" 

Eve managed to pull this off with a large but static world. When the game's world can be near infinite the casuals need not even see the hardcore regions if they don't want to.

But they can still go there whenever they feel up to the challenge and hardcore players can retreat to the casual regions when they need a break - something that cant be done if the game's world is pure casual or pure hardcore.

Letting different servers set the rules could work, especially where player worlds are concerned.

Actually, EVE didn't do that. EVE is a game that caters towards the hardcore players, and just simply provides a system to prevent it from becoming a free for all chaotic nonsensical mess. That's all it is. If they were catering to the casuals, they would make it impossible to kill people in "safe zones", but the reality is, they didn't. You can pop and kill people in safe zones whenever you like, the only governing factor is that they'll be a cost to do so (to discourage it from just happening all the time). The only "safe" place in EVE online currently is being docked. Additionally, if you happen to be in a corp that some other corp declares war against, Tough. Deal with it. You're going to get shipped/podded, blown to ribbons if you can't defend yourself regardless of where you are. "Safe" zones or not, and they'll not even be penalized. Free game.

Also, there was a quote from the devs.. "Toughen the f*** up". naturally not even filtered. They literally consider their game a brutal place that the weak don't deserve to thrive. That is far from a casual game, or even having any seperations thereof.

The only real thing about "You can experience everything in your own little nook" is the fact that there isn't really anything out there other than open space and other players. You can find that everywhere, and aside from some specific landmarks, it is simply a non-ending terrotory domination game. There is no other content at that point. So yes, you can experience it all in one place because there's nothing more out there to see.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2015, 09:19:19 PM by Luminaire »
Logged

Lily

  • Citizen
  • ****
  • Karma: 11
  • Posts: 379
    • View Profile
Re: What does Pathea think about casualisation.[marked]
« Reply #29 on: March 23, 2015, 10:20:44 AM »

I am amazed that the devs of every open world game I've seen so far have missed one very important aspect of the worlds they are creating.

These open worlds are so big, there is room for both casual and hardcore experiences.

If a player wants to stick to newbie valley, stepping out only to complete quests given by NPCs, that is entirely their business. In an open world game, newbie valley can be big enough to contain plenty of game for casual players.

Now if a player wants to plant his or her flag on the peak of Mt. Pain, that would be an entirely different experience. As long as the rewards are suitable, more hardcore players will take up the challenge. The rewards don't have to be huge material advantages either. Cosmetic or vanity rewards would work just as well.  And, yes, Mt. Pain is a PVP area.

Beyond that, there is room for players to set their own goals.  Do I stick to my little settlement in newbie valley or do I try to bring the world under my heel?
This actually doesn't work. D3 was a good example of why. Because even if you present challenges as special areas, they are all still considered "a part of the game, and must be experiencable!" by everyone.. D3 when released had 4 different difficulty settings. Normal, Nightmare, Hell, and an additional mode named Inferno. Inferno was for the truly hardcore players that liked a difficulty, and it lived up to that VERY well. it was damn near impossible.. But everyone complained.. why? Because it was difficult and they felt obligated to complete every element of the game without challenge and resistence. Even though it was meant for the more challenge oriented people, others simply couldn't leave it at that. Having other areas that don't fit the casual gameplay in a game that has casual gameplay angers people. It was so bad on D3 that they redid the entire difficulty settings design to make it all one playthrough with your option to change the difficulty settings on the fly, rather than having them as seperate modes that you unlock one by one in different game playthroughs.

Having different areas in the game that cater towards super challenges will just spurr people complaining that the area is OP and needs to be "nurfed".

and why? because hell has better items and people wanted that better items, that's the only reason. has anyone ever complained about Halo hardest difficulty being to hard? No one really cared because there was nothing special to get from except personal challenge.

And this again just proofes: people want the best but not really take the effort. They can't be happy with less than the best. If that part of diablo would no have better items, no one would would care about it at all except those who want it "hard". Some games have "iron man" modes, yet I hardly ever tried these modes, because from normal gameplay I have not found any game where I would expect this mode to work properly, since most games have to many random bugs giving you an unsatisfying end sooner or later.

Having many server rules or game rules to adjust would be great. Would also encourage people to make their own servers with their individual dream settings.

I would definately choose:

No fast travel
No self revival
reduced inventory. (only 3 tabs with max 1000 ore per stack)
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3