GGG vs replay-ability vs confidence?
|
First answer me this question please before you start to read :).
Would you stop having fun when your build comes together and it is viable for end-game content (this does not include BiS items, just viable) Wall of text imminent inside spoiler!
Spoiler
The thread tittle and my personal fascination with this concept!
The reason i wonder about this is : does GGG lack the confidence in there own design and the replay-ability that it offers to the huge amount of players? For example i have around 50+ builds aligned up in my passive tree planner that i still want to test, and for every character i end up playing i usually end up adding two more to that list :D! And this in itself is GREAT! I love that i am continually provoked into looking at new mechanics and how there powers can be combined. I love to theory-craft and combine mechanics i did not consider before because of lack of experience/knowledge. Another QQ L2P thread? I would hope not, i am perfectly fine with the current concept and model of the game, however i am not convinced it is unable to improve upon itself. The day this becomes a reality is the day i see PoE dying off. There is a difference between questioning the current system in place, and demanding change from the dev's. I am doing the former, i question the current design to provoke new innovative ways of tackling the concept. And hope to learn more about the dynamics currently in place and how to allow them to convey a better "gaming experience". Note : changing the "gaming experience" does involve changing the current system in place, but does not necessarily mean making the game any easier then it currently is. Since "gaming experience" is related to perception there are ways to alter perception without impacting the difficulty of the game. Resulting in a better "gaming experience" overall without diminishing what the game stands for. Simple example of how this can be done :
Spoiler
Take the coral rings for example, they offer a 30hp bonus at lvl 1, an easy way to increase the "carrot" feeling of a ring like this, is by making them give 5hp at lvl 1, and having different tiers within this item. Instead of getting a 35%hp increase at lvl 1, it becomes a 5% increase, which allows for a progression and a steady flow of carrots keeping the player engaged. This does not make the game any easier, on the contrary, but it does allow for a different feeling when obtaining these items.
The perceived lack of confidence on my part Personally when i see all my theory-crafts gated behind a wall of RNG and a 8 month grind to be viable, i question GGG's confidence. This comes naturally to me since i cannot believe i will stop playing the game when i am suddenly able to complete a viable build in 4 months, to move on to my next theory-craft and sometimes return to my older builds. I believe this game offers so much replay-ability that the mere creation of a single build should not be gated behind the endurance mill it currently is. Answer me this question, How many builds did you have in D2, what was the grind time for them to be "viable" for PvE, did you stop playing your builds once they where viable or did you pursue BiS gear, did you have a "fun" gaming experience in doing these things? Was the grind related to being "viable" or more related to "BiS" gear? (sorry for bringing D2 into this thread, it only serves as an example of different "gaming experiences") Now let's look at what GGG has in there current design that promote replay-ability, 1) 4 month-league's, no mater your success out of these league's, these independent league's are ladder driven and thus ensure replay-ability. 2) races, the same as above, they ensure replay-ability 3) constant development and patching, these ensure builds get balanced and some need a revision after "x" amount of patches, creating an endless replay-ability. 4) In depth mechanics and complex skill-tree, these two are related and create for more builds the longer one drowns himself in the knowledge and experience that comes with playing the game for a long time. I still manage to learn new fun ways of applying mechanics in different ways i previously did not consider. (point 3 amplify's this point even more, since it shift's point 4 constantly thus creating a never ending loop between the two) 5) BiS gear in the form of rare items, believe it or not, these ensure a lot of replay-ability in the long run, however these are BiS so the grind should naturally take a long effort. (viable gear =/= BiS) There are probably more that i am not aware off, but the question remains, with all these factors in place should GGG doubt the replay-ability of there game by making the "viable gear" locked behind the same endless RNG related grind as it is for BiS gear? Personally i believe for "BiS" gear the simple answer should be : YES! But for "viable gear" i find it hard to answer the same : YES! What do you guys think? Would the game die instantly when "viable gear" can be farmed within a reasonable time-frame or with a decent amount of certainty?
Spoiler
this is all my personal opinion, and anybody is free to disagree or prove fallacy's in my logic. I rarely take offense to that. Most of this is based upon assumptions, like the time to farm a character ETC a simple example of that is my own standard character which i geared in viable gear in 2 weeks and can run low life no shavs in maps up to lvl 73 maps without danger, however this was attained by finding a soul taker/rainbow stride and thunderfist in 14 maps total, proving that the game gains a tremendous boost in "fun player experience" if RNG shines on you, which is also it's fallacy imo, since the reverse is equally applicable
Any thoughts, other then the obvious troll's coming in to say my tears are delicious and it's another QQ thread. I would very much like to discuss this with some people. And like i mentioned i have no issue with the current design, i am young and have plenty of time to make all my builds over a period of 20 years if the dev's so desire :). This is purely out of interest and to employ some creativity. Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes
| |
" When the build is endgame viable, my fun only begins. That stuff before maps is just a tutorial and a chore. When night falls
She cloaks the world In impenetrable darkness |
|
|
Yes, I think it's a general lack of confidence which provides for much of the unnecessary RNG in the game. People like being demi-gods, people like the feeling of being able to steam-roll content. People don't like meandering, especially not in an aRPG. I'm not sure where the victory then quit mentality comes from, I feel sure the stats would prove that no victory would equate to more quits statistically, but then I don't have any data.
I'm guessing the main problem with the modern setting is all the avenues for cheating the process of being on-line creates. I see a lot of excuses for much of the negatives about the game stemming from anti-cheat systems - which I suppose is quite a tough nut to crack! |
|
|
Boem: I think that the questions you are asking are questions that most of these ARPG companies ask themselves when they theorycraft the economy for their games.
I shudder to think what the meetings for D3 were like when someone suggested that it take people around 100 hours to find a legendary. Did people really stand up and say that was a good idea? They must have. Most likely they held that discussion after already deciding that they were building an auction house. It's the only reasoning that supports such a grind. The PoE meetings have probably come to the conclusion that they would like people to have a solid build at the end of a 4 month period. They realize some people have more time and will reach this threshold quicker than others, but they do seem to think of 4 months as a solid character building period. Item drop rates are then scaled to meet these goals. It's never that they want us to suffer through an extremely long grind. They do want us however, to have a goal to meet that provides some sort of a challenge. So the drop rates are tailored to meet that. I play another ARPG: Marvel Heroes. The devs made so many changes to drop rates early on that it was clear they didn't even have these meetings. They were just throwing things at their customers and seeing what stuck. So your concern is that you won't be able to make all of your builds in a reasonable amount of time? You do realize that it is a fairly small amount of people that will stick around for 2-3 builds let alone 20 correct? So while it would be wonderful to have it narrowed down to a month or two per build it would also leave most of the population with their goals attained. For some that would mean retirement, for others just the beginning of a glorious loot hunt. GGG had to balance this, and while I wouldn't mind the drop rate easing up slightly, I do appreciate and understand their goals and decisions. |
|
" If viable means facerolling, then yes. I would stop playing that build because facerolling is boring and concentrate on another one. And then I would come back to it sometimes when I want to feel like a God. If viable means getting by, propably also yes. I would stop playing that build out of a feeling that I have achieved something and because I find repetition boring. Then I would concentrate on another build and come back to it when I feel like giving farming high-end gear a shot. " I personally think, exactly the opposite. PoE is still lacking a bit in uniques that "inspire" new builds. But not so in skillgems. Skillgems offer huge replayability. For me the formula is simple: People will play PoE when they find it satisfying. When they find it satisfying, they will make new builds when their old ones start to bore them. And if they get bored nonetheless and leave, they will return one day, because they have fond memories and will be curious about the new stuff. But if they find PoE unsatisfactory, they will leave and won't come back. They don't have fond memories and when asked about it, they will say so. " For me this is at the heart of the problem, where GGG really errs. BiS uniques and the top 20-30% tiers should be as rare as a snowflake in hell, but anything below that MUST not. This would open up an avalanche of possibilities for everyone, without betraying the hardcore-grinders and -traders and without people getting fed up lootwise. Last edited by Jojas#5551 on Jan 17, 2014, 1:51:08 PM
|
|
|
Thanks for the responses so far guys, i am happy to see some have opened the spoiler :D!
Nobody needed to read all that so i appreciate the time you took to do it. I would just like to comment on the following while i read your responses.(keep in mind i read them all but wont respond to them all, everybody can present his own case in this thread :) ) However this one caught my eye :), presented by majesw. " First of all, let me start by pointing out, my only concern lie's within the potential that PoE can achieve and might have difficulty in achieving due to the lack of confidence in the strength of the system they created. This is however my own opinion, and may vary widely within this community, i am aware of that. I would just like to point out that within that mind-set there is also a reverse loop if you will. Which is demonstrated in the current game state. When you say that currently people only stick around for 2-3 builds, let alone 20 builds. I would like to point out that a lot of people might forgo the additional builds based upon there experience of completing a single build. Let's say a person enjoys his build, but it took him 8 months to finalize his "viable gear". then he makes the consideration, i enjoy the end-game, it's a lot of fun, but do i want to invest another 8 months into creating another build? I have pointed this out with my "the burn-out or the carrot" thread. Where i theorize about the fact that people never reach any form of carrot resulting in a burn-out before reaching the "fun part" of the game. Resulting in an exodus before full game potential is realized. This subject has very high variables, i am aware of that i am by no means highly intelligent or up to date to oversee all the factors that come into play. But player experience imo should consist of a "fun" time. This does not exclude the "hardcore" presented in this game. Fun can be hardcore, there is no problem with that, it is about player experience and perception, and both can be molded. I mean no offense majesw, just another opinion on the same mater. (my prediction would be that there is higher player retention when the overall game experience allows for more "fun" or carrots if you will, without attaining the very high end BiS or "hardcore" in the game, if creating a single build was highly enjoyable as a "process" i would say it automatically presents itself to create another build to recreate that "fun process", "hardcore fun" is not excluded within this option since it is presented in attaining gear higher then "viable gear" also known as "BiS" and endured progression over time) Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes
| |
" This assumes you are right that the number of people who will stick around to theorycraft is relatively small - are you just repeating what someone else has said, or do you honestly believe this from some kind of experience/statistic? If people do 'retire' from a 4 months league after one month, wont they be back for the next one anyway? And what difference does it make to the bottom line if someone plays for one month or four? Won't they have paid the same amount of money? ie: If they're just going to do one four month league and nothing else, ever, then it doesn't matter if they are fed through the system in one month or four? The glorious loot hunt is done by all players anyway isn't it? I dunno, I just don't see the correlation between the numbers sticking around being higher with a slower goal-time than with a quicker goal-time but more enjoyable experience. From what I can gather, people have such a huge variety of personal goals that I fail to see why over-egging one particular play-style/preference has the majority financial influence? |
|
|
Boem: All of your points are valid. There are those that will not stick around for more than a single build if they know that the grind toward the next will be too much for them. There are also those who complete a single build and continue to play it, never thinking of making any others.
So let me get this straight... You are suggesting something like the following... 1. Keep BiS items super rare and hard to obtain like they currently are... 2. Increase the drop rate of "good" rares and build enabling uniques by some unspecified amount. In your mind this would increase people's interest in the game and their interest in continuing to build characters? I could see this being somewhat effective. However, I'd like to provide a warning that in ARPG's it is never the mediocre items that truly make me want to make a build, but the absolute top tier items. My facebreaker build is fun and effective, but the character I play is my soul-taker blender :-/ |
|
|
I doubt the developers would have publicly released the game in October if they lacked confidence in their product.
|
|
" Cronk, that's my whole point... GGG is trying to balance their game to fill the interests of as many people as possible. They are the ones with statistics to support their decisions. I'm just guessing based on my personal experiences. |
|
