64 replies to this topic

[Zakatak]

Kaemon, on 13 May 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

What is it with people unable to finish their sentences in OP?

Its almost like....

I think it's because...

[Kenyon Burguess]

who doesnt love mad libs?

[MacabreDerek]

Red_October911, on 13 May 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

Y do some of you guys want a simple game, like mentioned b4 a free online game can have so much potential.

I hope you arn't confusing Simple with a lack of depth. If you ever played Go you would understand simple mechanics can draw alot of depth. Complex games have the issue of being unable to hold newcomers, because it becomes overwhelming and off-putting. This removes the chance to bring in a new player base, which quickly leads to stagnation. Adding systems does not translate into depth, and frequently muddles the focus of a game and adds to development time and money, which does not make a better game, just a more convoluted game.

The idea of "It would be cool if they added X" rarely translates into a well-made game, but instead translates into another convoluted system that the player has to keep track of for no reason other than to add another way to waste the players time (I am thinking of Mass Effect 2's mining mini-game).

The most effective method of game creation is to take away, reduce it down to the component systems that are focused on delivering the core experience you want to bring, and find the most effective way to present it to the player. It's then developing systems that support the core experience, and unfortunately this is where so many games get muddled. At the end of the day, it's that simple core that is well thought out that makes for a strong game, not the bells and whistles trying to bury that experience.

Simplest example outside of 'Go' that I can think of is Street Fighter 2. Basic punches, kicks, a few special moves, but the moves are only the surface element. Behind the press of a button to kick is the concepts of Zoning, Priority, Control, Mind Games, etc. It's not because these things were built in as separate add-on systems, but as a part of SF2's core experience. You have the ability to engage the player with simple surface elements, and as they play they find the complexity and depth in among the simple core experiences.

For MWO, I hope they avoid things like Salvage and Loss of XP, because they add nothing to the core experience and in fact detract from it. For MWO to work, it's going to focus on the core experience, which is designing mechs, positioning, LOS, Cover, etc. Until these systems from basic movement and shooting are polished and brought to a level where there is nuances, anything else you add will simply water down and over-complicate it.

[Aegis Kleais]

Kaemon, on 13 May 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

What is it with people unable to finish their sentences in OP?

Its almost like....

I've always taken it as a sign of inbreeding.

[Thor77]

Insidious Johnson, on 13 May 2012 - 02:53 PM, said:

Ok... lets change the phrase Mech Sim to Hot Chick. Lets change the phrase play to something MUCH more suggestive ( everyone pick their own verb here ). Remember there has been 11 years since the last time you put noun and verb together. Now, do you really want to get upset about crackers in bed? Think about it...

Brilliantly put. I'm sure 90% of the complaining will stop once we finally get to [snuggle] a [Hot Chick] again. However, since the [Hot Chick] is not coming over until late summer or whatever, you can bet there's gonna be a lot of complaining, irritability, and wild, unfounded speculation in the meantime.

Edited by Thor77, 13 May 2012 - 03:50 PM.

[Monte0704]

I hate to make this reference, but as far as the losing XP goes... take Wii Sports for instance. If you don't perform up to par, you lose XP. If you do better than your average, you get more XP. Sooner or later, it pretty much averages out, and you can see how a Mechwarrior performs on average just by looking at their running XP.

[Aidan]

I think almost every team in MWO will probably looks like this: *Just substitute a Joy Stick for a console controller*

[JHare]

Meh, I vote that during matches if you're playing stock variants, it is a minimum of time before your mech gets online again. If you are playing with your precious custom mech, then you can pay hideous repair fees or extra time. Something like that to discourage min/maxing even more

[Waladil]

I am strongly against the idea of losing XP if you die, and I'd also argue that there should be a setup where repairs are guaranteed, even if you can't pay. (So if you hit $0, you can then repair for free.)

All the arguments, especially about losing streaks, worry me most because of how hard it will already be for new players to break into an "old boys club."

Some time ago, my friends convinced me to play an online FPS, I forget which at this point, one of the games from ijji I think. When I first started, I played very well in the rookie games, typically coming in top 5 at worst (16-32 player matches), often being #1. As soon as I got the score that meant I had to leave the rookie leagues and enter the main matches... I was smacked DOWN by the more experienced players. Hard. It was bad enough struggling, especially because I couldn't afford to get any new stuff because I was barely getting enough to keep my old gear in good condition. If my character was getting worse too, I'd probably have ended up giving up because I'd be playing against players at top condition and not getting any worse, while I'm at low condition and not getting any better. Even if I was a better player than them I'd still be screwed.

While things like repair time and pilot XP loss make good simulations, they also skew the game in favor of the people who have been playing the longest, which means that games become gerontocracies rather than competitions.

Under a system like that, the very beginning will be "fair," since nobody's familiar with the game yet. The people with the greatest advantage will be the people who know the lore and those who played whichever MechWarrior the game ends up being most similar to. Before long, tricks will begin to surface that the players who use best will start accumulating victories. They exist in every game and are not something that's "shameful" or exploit-y. Just tricks... like good hotkey management in StarCraft, or quickscoping in CoD. As new players hit the field, they'll be initially barraged by older players who are much more accomplished in those tricks, and the new players will have to play catch-up to learn them. If we also penalize those new players for not yet knowing the skills, by the time they master the skills they'll be so far beaten down in terms of 'mech damage, lost xp, they might as well make a fresh account rather than try to build the old one back up. So (to my mind) adding those elements of punishing losers actually ends up breaking a simulation, because it gives incentives for players to (essentially) murder their old pilot and reincarnate him/her. Yeah. Real good simulation, just like reality!

[Mr Smiles]

Kaemon, on 13 May 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

What is it with people unable to finish their sentences in OP?

Its almost like....

If I could dislike people/posts/threads for doing that, I would make a dozen alternate accounts just to grind them to dust. It's REALLY annoying.

Also, Candlejack.

[Insidious Johnson]

Waladil, on 13 May 2012 - 04:05 PM, said:

I am strongly against the idea of losing XP if you die, and I'd also argue that there should be a setup where repairs are guaranteed, even if you can't pay. (So if you hit $0, you can then repair for free.)

All the arguments, especially about losing streaks, worry me most because of how hard it will already be for new players to break into an "old boys club."

Some time ago, my friends convinced me to play an online FPS, I forget which at this point, one of the games from ijji I think. When I first started, I played very well in the rookie games, typically coming in top 5 at worst (16-32 player matches), often being #1. As soon as I got the score that meant I had to leave the rookie leagues and enter the main matches... I was smacked DOWN by the more experienced players. Hard. It was bad enough struggling, especially because I couldn't afford to get any new stuff because I was barely getting enough to keep my old gear in good condition. If my character was getting worse too, I'd probably have ended up giving up because I'd be playing against players at top condition and not getting any worse, while I'm at low condition and not getting any better. Even if I was a better player than them I'd still be screwed.

While things like repair time and pilot XP loss make good simulations, they also skew the game in favor of the people who have been playing the longest, which means that games become gerontocracies rather than competitions.

Under a system like that, the very beginning will be "fair," since nobody's familiar with the game yet. The people with the greatest advantage will be the people who know the lore and those who played whichever MechWarrior the game ends up being most similar to. Before long, tricks will begin to surface that the players who use best will start accumulating victories. They exist in every game and are not something that's "shameful" or exploit-y. Just tricks... like good hotkey management in StarCraft, or quickscoping in CoD. As new players hit the field, they'll be initially barraged by older players who are much more accomplished in those tricks, and the new players will have to play catch-up to learn them. If we also penalize those new players for not yet knowing the skills, by the time they master the skills they'll be so far beaten down in terms of 'mech damage, lost xp, they might as well make a fresh account rather than try to build the old one back up. So (to my mind) adding those elements of punishing losers actually ends up breaking a simulation, because it gives incentives for players to (essentially) murder their old pilot and reincarnate him/her. Yeah. Real good simulation, just like reality!

Counterpoint: Why punish veterans because of new people? You too CAN become a veteran. Gut it out, wade through the crap to get to the glory like everyone before you has. In fact lets be honest here, you want all the pew pew pew ability of a veteran without the time or pain invested. Who doesn't want all gain with no pain... until you've got it and cannot appreciate it. So, the tried and true approach of Gut it Out elminates the end game problem of having everything and not being able to appreciate it. Motivate yourself and reduce the onus of that burden from your team and you will be a valued member of it. Don't, and the peasants will rejoice @ your absence.

Further on that note... who wants an "ebay" player on their team in ANY genre? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

[MacabreDerek]

Insidious Johnson, on 13 May 2012 - 04:15 PM, said:

Counterpoint: Why punish veterans because of new people? You too CAN become a veteran. Gut it out, wade through the crap to get to the glory like everyone before you has. In fact lets be honest here, you want all the pew pew pew ability of a veteran without the time or pain invested. Who doesn't want all gain with no pain... until you've got it and cannot appreciate it. So, the tried and true approach of Gut it Out elminates the end game problem of having everything and not being able to appreciate it. Motivate yourself and reduce the onus of that burden from your team and you will be a valued member of it. Don't, and the peasants will rejoice @ your absence.

Further on that note... who wants an "ebay" player on their team in ANY genre? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Few problems I think your counter-point brings up. First off, nothing he suggested penalized the vet player. To say "You too can become a veteran. Gut it out" is probably the worst attitude to take, particularly when it comes to smaller games who are not whole-heartedly mainstream (And for as much of a fan-base MW has, it is a nieche market). You want to welcome in new players, invite them to participate at their own skill level and develop, perhapse even inspire. The problem with 'Stiff-upper-lip' is that in the end we value our time in play, and if that time is feeling wasted by being destroyed repeatedly with no gains, or worse yet (as has been suggested by the XP penalty) harmed for losing, it will turn into a situation where the game truely is not worth your time and frustration.

If you want to discuss how to build a player from the ground up, you have to accept first and formost that you have to give the player a reason to continue playing, and that they find value in their expirence and time playing. For the person feeling like they are developing skills, they will push themselves, but that breed of player is rare.

I am not suggesting that veterans are knocked down a peg to let the less experienced players 'enjoy' the game, simply that the game needs to be a rewarding experience for the player.

I picture the idea of 'Tough it out' alot like the five year old tossed into a shark tank to learn how to swim, and then blame that five year old for getting eaten. There have been many ways to go about balancing what kinds of players compete with who, and the balance can develop into building experience more rewarding when they do find themselves finally at a level where they can compete with the people who are able to log in hundreds of hours and have already with previous installments.

The over-all problem with an elitist attitude is it pushes aside the newcomer, and regards them entirely without worth, and rather than try to help that player learn and develop into a lance-mate you can rely on, you will simply burn bridges and find the field of players shrinking by the day. For a F2P game that relies on micro-transactions, this is a death sentence.

[Waladil]

See, that's exactly what I'm NOT saying. I'm saying that penalties to game stats based on losses make it unneccesarily difficult to become a veteran.

Compare two players. Both of them have great natural skill. The first, (Jim, let's say) got MWO on day one. He learned the game quickly and became quite a star. The second (Jenny) didn't get MWO until... two years after release. Jenny had the same exact player-learning curve as Jim. That is to say they both learned the ins and outs of the game at the same rate. It took both of them exactly six hours to learn that it takes a PPC round moves at 250 m/s and thus how much they should lead their shots based on this fact.

However, Jim climbed this curve at a time when everyone was struggling up it. It was day one, nobody knew the secrets yet. By the time Jenny gets to it, there are a group of people who dominate every match, and kick her ***, even though she's learning quickly. But by the time she knows every trick, and reaches "mastery" when she's just as good at the game as Jim... she's still going to be at a disadvantage, because Jim's had time to accrue in-game rewards that Jenny just hasn't. This is a fact of gaming, and it probably cannot be stamped out. But systems that harshly penalize you for losing exacerbate this and make it so much worse.

In this example, if Jim and Jenny were given identical loadouts, identical character skill, and fought match after match, they'd average to a 50/50 ratio, because they too are equally skilled. However, because there are any in-game rewards, Jim will win more often, and to some extent that's his right because he's invested more time. But a penalization for loss makes this so much worse. Say Jim and Jenny start playing matches against each other, with whatever they can get in-game. At first, Jim wins 70% of the time, Jenny wins 30%, representing Jim's greater in-game equipment. Under a penalization system, as time passes Jim is going to win more and more, and Jenny will lose more and more, because she's being pressed for resources. Maybe she has to leave her favorite Mad Cat in the garage for a match, and gets trounced because of the lack. Over time, perhaps dozens or hundreds of matches, Jim is winning nearly every time, because Jenny is constantly forced to resort to cheaper and cheaper materiel.

THAT is what I'm arguing against.

What I want, is a game that lets people who play hard, think fast, and are skilled to be the best. Not a game where victory directly correlates with playhours.

[Iolobliss]

Waladil, on 13 May 2012 - 04:05 PM, said:

I am strongly against the idea of losing XP if you die, and I'd also argue that there should be a setup where repairs are guaranteed, even if you can't pay. (So if you hit $0, you can then repair for free.)

All the arguments, especially about losing streaks, worry me most because of how hard it will already be for new players to break into an "old boys club."

Some time ago, my friends convinced me to play an online FPS, I forget which at this point, one of the games from ijji I think. When I first started, I played very well in the rookie games, typically coming in top 5 at worst (16-32 player matches), often being #1. As soon as I got the score that meant I had to leave the rookie leagues and enter the main matches... I was smacked DOWN by the more experienced players. Hard. It was bad enough struggling, especially because I couldn't afford to get any new stuff because I was barely getting enough to keep my old gear in good condition. If my character was getting worse too, I'd probably have ended up giving up because I'd be playing against players at top condition and not getting any worse, while I'm at low condition and not getting any better. Even if I was a better player than them I'd still be screwed.

While things like repair time and pilot XP loss make good simulations, they also skew the game in favor of the people who have been playing the longest, which means that games become gerontocracies rather than competitions.

Under a system like that, the very beginning will be "fair," since nobody's familiar with the game yet. The people with the greatest advantage will be the people who know the lore and those who played whichever MechWarrior the game ends up being most similar to. Before long, tricks will begin to surface that the players who use best will start accumulating victories. They exist in every game and are not something that's "shameful" or exploit-y. Just tricks... like good hotkey management in StarCraft, or quickscoping in CoD. As new players hit the field, they'll be initially barraged by older players who are much more accomplished in those tricks, and the new players will have to play catch-up to learn them. If we also penalize those new players for not yet knowing the skills, by the time they master the skills they'll be so far beaten down in terms of 'mech damage, lost xp, they might as well make a fresh account rather than try to build the old one back up. So (to my mind) adding those elements of punishing losers actually ends up breaking a simulation, because it gives incentives for players to (essentially) murder their old pilot and reincarnate him/her. Yeah. Real good simulation, just like reality!

As I mentioned before you would not be able to fall behind the abilities/experience points that you possess when you start playing MW:O for the first time, therefore, your worries are unjustified (also with regard to people 'murdering' their account and, possibly, losing the user account name or making it unavailable for a while) and picture this, without any challenge in the game there will be no long-term motivation ... if you make the whole game too simple and everything just gets thrown at you (no matter, if you succeed or lose all the time), where is the fun, motivation, and achievement (also for new players) in that?

In fact, the XP/abilites grading system would be fairly balanced and everyone gets the same chances at start-up ... yes, admittedly the game environment and gameplay will change after a while, once initial players get more experience and the more tricks/cheats are available and if MW:O will become a very popular game (I think we all hope for that), attracting a lot of people that have not immersed themselves in the BattleTech Universe before (outside the current majority of enthusiasts), it will get even more difficult to prove yourself as a newbie in the game. However, this is the reality in any online computer game, and to believe you can change that is honourable but also very naive at the same time. Find your place in the environment, make the most of it and be happy with it ... after all it is just a game!

There is no shame in not being one of those who may rank in the daily best overall mech pilot stats section of a faction or MW:O and, while it may come with bragging rights (and, I may add, usually not unjustifiably so), you may just have to learn to deal with it. Otherwise, if your self-esteem is too low to withstand that kind of "pressure", online computer gaming will just not be the right passtime for you, it's that simple. A XP/ability system that stepwise evaluates your performance will encourage people to get better, work on themselves, practice and thrive ... plus, if you have not obtained anything as a rookie there is nothing to lose for you (based on the principle described at the beginning of this posting). However, it will become increasingly challenging the higher you would like to advance in the game and in my opinion this is how it should be (similar to high level campaigns in online RPGs such as Dungeon and Dragons Online or others to which you will not have access when playing the game the first time, but which you will have to earn by advancing in the game, thus, continuously improving your own skills ... it comes at a price as everything in life) ... not everyone can ace the game and not everyone wants to (I certainly will not have the time resources to train and become one of these, but I want to have fun and be challenged the more I advance in the game) and you also have to take into account that this is mostly a group based game and not a solo player one (with the exception of Solaris VII arena fights, initial training/academy one-on-one tests, Trial of Positions or similar).

Edited by Iolobliss, 13 May 2012 - 06:03 PM.

[Gremlich Johns]

Get used to disappointment...

[FinnMcKool]

Aldinvor, on 13 May 2012 - 01:41 PM, said:

losing XP makes no sense, ejecting from a 'mech causes brain damage? I'd hate to know what happens to a pilot that loses 10 in a row...

thats EZ, they just get involved in politics.

[Insidious Johnson]

well said lololobliss... er whatever. I don't care about the XP system.. one WHIT. I'm here for the long haul just as with previous titles. In no way, shape or form am I willing to forgo any gains brought about by pain just because some belle of the ball shows up late. I've been a vet and I've been a n00b. It is what it is. If it is something I want to play or achieve, I do it. Otherwise, I do not. The idea cannot be reduced to a simpler form. If you don't have it in you to reach out and grab what you want, don't complain that you'll never get it, you've already decided that for yourself. In general I see too many people bemoaning the tribulations rather than staying focused on the goal.

Let me reverse it the argument for edification. The veterans are old, and getting older. My reflexes are shot and I'm now legally blind. Should you be forced to hold still so I can get a 'fair' shot? No! Should I get magic lead indicating reticles to compensate for advanced decrepitude? No! Why would I want it? When I beat someone, I want it to be all me doing the work. I want all the credit I earn not all the credit I've earned in the past. Nor do I want free credit just because someone wants to give it to me to make themselves feel benevolent. However, the tactics I've learned over the years are always at my disposal. You cannot salvage them from me, but you can watch and learn. That is ALL I give away. Now go earn a name for yourself, try to make it a name worth repeating in mixed company.

[Waladil]

Well said indeed lolobliss. Well, that is, it would be well said if you were actually discussing the problems I'm worrying about. Your post is very well-crafted to make people agree with you and sound upbeat and optimistic.

Pity, of course, that it's also subtly off-topic. Nothing you say justifies the things I'm arguing against: Severe XP/monetary penalties to loss. I'm not even arguing against "Well, you lost, so you only get 10% of earned XP and money." I'm arguing against "Well, you lost, so you only get 10% of earned XP and money, and the repairs to your 'mech are gonna cost you twice what you earned and also your pilot broke his pinky so firing your beam weapons is gonna be a little slow for a while. Good luck winning next game though!"

And my discussion of one-on-one combat was merely an example to show (in simplified form) how poisonous the penalties are. One could make the same example, but with lances of players rather than individuals.

And Insidious, I'm not arguing for giving n00bs handholds. I don't want them myself. I'm just trying to prevent the game from teabagging players, heaping insult and injury on those who happened to lose. If a n00b neglects to put in the time and effort to get good, he or she ought to sink down. But the game shouldn't actively prevent improvement.

[Red October911]

Well in a perfect world (the 90's), we vets would get all the challenge and the subsequent satisfaction of our efforts into overcoming these challenges.

But what I've noticed from many of these comments is that getting any form of handicap/delay in achieving XP is impossible nowadays since the mentality has changed.

Nowadays the average gamer is like:"OMG why am I constantly dying?! This game sucks!" Where as back in the day the average gamer would try to find a solution to over come this problem in anyway possible and then gain pleasure from actually accomplishing this (thinking about killing Harabec's Predator in Starsiege, man was that ever hard...)



(^ for those who don't know what i'm talking about, then again this guy makes it look like a piece of cake.)

Anyways...as long as the developpers stick true to the BT universe i'll be happy no matter what. (Still have hope for some sort of challenge tho i.e Trail of acceptance to get in clans would be neat)

[Juiced]

I dont see why the need to punish someone for lossing is such a big deal for you.

Let people have their fun. If you and the "loser" have all the same equipment and (eventually) XP, you are going to destroy the "loser" regardless, why make it worse for them? All you are doing is spoiling peoples fun, especially people who just want to have some fun driving a mech. Folks who dont win are already going to get less xp and c-bills and thus will upgrade slower.

The fun motivation and achievement comes from beating other people and just having fun blowing things up. Achievement can come in the form of a ranking system, either by house, tonnage, class of mech or role. If can come in knowing you have won a dozen battles in a row, that you average 3 mech kills a game....... all of which does not require you to punish someone else for lossing.