PotatoMcWhiskey's page

@All - the can flipping examples are perfect illustrations of the different in approach we're going to take compared to CCP.

CCP's most basic rule is that if the players find a way to do something interesting and unexpected with the game, CCP will remain "hands off" unless that thing breaks a core game system like the economy, or crashes servers, or compromises player account security. They basically feel that finding advantages from the game system that are opaque to other players is a reward for being clever.(*)

The whole can-flipping scheme derives from a user interface failure, compounded by a game system design flaw. The design flaw is that the contents of objects can be manipulated to change the flags they generate when characters interact with them in illogical ways. The user interface failure is that there was little done to communicate the risk a character is taking when they interact with one of those game objects.

The players who got hurt by this system didn't get hurt because they did something "dumb" within the context of the game world. They got hurt because there was this bizarre corner case where they could effectively be blind to the risk they were taking by doing something that appeared otherwise completely ordinary and routine. CCP sees that as a virtue. I see that as a mistake. The damaged player wasn't making bad choices. The damaged player got hurt because the game had structural flaws. Saying that those flaws might engender some future sense of caution, or that they could be learned by reading extensive and arcane websites and wikis doesn't fix the fundamental problem.

Taking a risk, and...

I think its perfectly fine to fix any issue that causes an incorrect/unfair game system to come about due to a bug.

However to punish players for using it, or to declare in an exploit against the ToS etc and that anyone using it will be reprimanded is an absurd position that a lot of developers take and I hope you dont.

The best example I can describe is a bug that was in Planetside 2 that I had many debates over. It was possible to reload a gun almost instantly if you performed a specific action.

My view is that the only way for there to be a level playing field when a bug exists that gives a player a distinct advantage is for everyone to use it and be informed about it until it is fixed.

I encountered a large portion of players who are "Scrubs", who I name after a little known book "Play to Win".

http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/intermediates-guide.html

They felt that anyone using this bug should be banned, regardless whether or not they had any knowledge of the developers stance on it, whether they knew it was an exploit or a mechanic and that it was "dishonourable".

This is an incredibly frustrating mentality and ideal to come up against coming from a background of extreme competitiveness and a mentality of no artificial limitations.

Fix your game, don't punish the player. If you broke the game you have no grounds to punish players from using a bug to their advantage as forbidding it just creates a scenario where the people who know about it, are competitive and aren't using it get very frustrated having to lose to the guys who are using it and not being punished for it. As its inevitable for at least a portion of the people using an exploit to go unpunished you basically give away a lottery system of free wins to people who otherwise don't deserve it. Let everyone use it, and make it a priority to fix it.

I will always follow the rules if the developers state them, but knowing that there are people out there who aren't and are winning when they shouldn't that will also go unpunished really grinds my gears.

I was known as Jamboreen then, much drinking and carousing was involved. Still in touch with some of those gentlemen.

I've found in games that from an art perspective that any attempt to go for a realism centric aesthetic or anything resembling it - think Everquest, Mil Sim shooters, some RPGs, darkfall is another example - end up with their graphics dating very quickly. This could mean that 2-3 years at the latest your game looks like ass.

On the other hand games that go with a strong individual stylistic aesthetic - think World of Warcraf, XIII, Legend of Zelda Wind Waker, Bastion etc - look good for years after their technical (poly count/texture resolution) sell by date. I mean compare games that came out around the time WoW came out and even games after, WoW is clearly and aestheticall superior game because they avoided the pitfall of trying to compete with a ever advancing technical world and instead forged a strong aesthetic that still stands quite well some 11(?) years later.

Its for this reason I have very little time for people who complain about cartoonish artstyles, especially for MMo's which are supposed to be played and experienced for years. Its very costly to keep the graphics on par with the ever advancing capabilities of modern computers, which is why many mmo game developers just don't. Its the difference between attempting to update every single character model and texture in the game every year or two and just occasionally bumping up the resolution every now and again.

A strong aesthetic will be with us for basically forever, but graphical fidelity dates incredibly fast. I'm very glad they have gone with the style they did.

My name is Robert Pauls... I mean PotatoMcWhiskey.

I'm a urchin of Maelstrom Company, you will most likely find me carousing with invisible women who I most definitely slept with yes-sire-e. Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I'm cranky, cantankerous and loveable. I live long walks in the blood sands at midnight and I'm looking for a strong she-badger to make some sweet badgerlings with who may or may not be eaten by hawks.

I hate everyone in this thread, especially Cyneric as he is forcing me to post on these forums on pain of death.

I reluctantly declare myself blandly interested in being an active member of Maelstrom.

Don't help Morbis by the way - hes very shady looking. There is a science to recognising people who don't deserve help, and filthy scotsmen like himself are almost always undeserving.

I'm honestly quite shocked at how pretty those goblins are graphically - compared to what I've come to expect from games developed in this genre, elephant in the room being Darkfall.

Grass could use some work, but those goblins are the bomb - can't wait to bash their skulls in! :)

I can't really see how this improves the gameplay in a good ratio to the amount of development time required to implement, test and balance it. Its a cool idea and all but it doesn't really bring much to the table.

For example, lets say you're a travelling murderer who is happily going around garrote and knifing friendly travelers and merchants. You accumulate a decent sized pot of gold but unfortunately find yourself with a dozen different currencies and none of them stack. They can't be melted down neatly either so you're kind of stuck with a handful of useless coins sitting in your bank. Its great for a immersion, but it doesn't really do anything else except create minor annoyances.

Lets also say you are a nice traveler going about your normal trading routines and you head off to a local trade hub to grab some supplies to the tune of say 500 golden coins. The journey is 15 minutes and once you arrive you discover - Alas! You are a handful of coins short, and unfortunately the trader wont take short change, better get back on your horse dear traveler and go grab some more cash cause you're frankly s!%* out of luck!

It would be awesome if we could have this, but i see more problems than solutions in relation to how much immersion and fun it would bring. Having a "transaction Account" for handling player finances is dull, boring and immersion breaking but its a good compromise to some of the headaches I've experienced in some games and I quite welcome this system.