I support this idea.
Search Posts
I think the way Guild Wars 2 is doing it seems to be about perfect. They will allow the player to replace the game's music files with their own selections. Not only that, they have one hell of a composer working on their own, so many will probably not even think of customizing it.
While a nice hybrid, it does kill some of the things that I love about the skill through time system, namely the fact that me and my friends can easily stay at exactly be at the same grade always, the only variance in power being wealth, which between each-other we can opt to distribute as we desire. What about the whole time ≠ power philosophy the developers go by? If time ≠ power, then what's the big deal of falling behind in terms of skills?
Yup, GrumpyMel's got the right idea. Strikes a good balance, I think. No way. Having to wait 3-5 seconds per round, kinda like a semi-turn-based game? Imagine a battle with 100 people rofl wow. Pretty much every combat system in games requires planning, strategy, and tactics for optimal results (unless, of course, the battle is hugely imbalanced like a high level killing a low level in themepark MMO's). You may think Call of Duty is all twitch, but players that are smart and can shoot a target before even being noticed are the real winners. Positioning, which gun to use, how to progress through a map, when to stun, when to use your secondary, where to place/throw your explosives, when to use your kill streaks; even the twitchiest will get owned if they don't know how to engage their enemies in the most effective manner. To me, the perfect combat system values precision and reflexes AND intelligence and tactics.
The game I played that had the coolest and most engaging combat system is without a doubt Dark Messiah of Might and Magic.
Personaly, I'm hoping that PFO IS largely based upon PLAYER skill...but not at all on the speed or skill with which you handle the input controls.... I'm looking for something that tests a Players skill in tactical and strategic thinking... could care less about the active play stuff. I don't want the challenge to be making the input controls... You'll probably be disappointed then. Your hopes would necessitate a turn-based combat system, and one of the developers has already stated that PFO will not make use of a turn-based system for obvious reasons. Unless they severely restrict movement while in combat (which I doubt), it most certainly will involve one's reflexes, quickness, and twitch.
Perhaps you could tell us *what* did not entice, *how* the missions were boring, and *why* mining was once again boring to you. I never had any issues with the UI or the controls and seldomly have I heard any complaints about them. I have never heard anyone say EvE combat is "boring". Just watch the video. Those were the EXACT first impressions I got from playing EVE.
I'm sure everyone has noticed that the developers over at Goblinworks are quite fond of EVE Online, and while EVE Online may be considered an extremely unique MMO with several different activities to partake in, in the grand scheme of things, quantity does not equate to quality. The quality of the gameplay itself, the action, the player input, the act of doing things mostly feels stale across many levels. Some may point out that risk is all a game needs to make gameplay fun, I digress. At many points in EVE, things feel slow, boring, and stale because the gameplay is not fun, for there isn't risk 100% of the time. The controls are not intuitive, the combat isn't exciting, the UI is cluttered, travelling is boring, mining is boring, doing missions is boring, etc. If the fun factor relies heavily upon the risk factor, then there is something seriously wrong with the core gameplay mechanics. Playing the game itself should feel enticing. It should captivate you from the very first minute. You may say that EVE Online only gets better as you play more, but the harsh reality of things is that first impressions are crucial in forming opinions about anything. Gameplay needs to be gripping from the get-go. The number one reason I would log out of EVE was because I would get sleepy. At 4PM. Funny little video (lower volume down a bit before watching): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMSjd6HNQdY
What I mean by caping the barb is reaching the end of the barbarian's progression (getting the capstone badge). This system's success depends so much on Goblinworks' implementation of their vision on power progression (time = options ≠ power). Guess we will have to wait for more details to reach adequate and reasonable conclusions.
Personally, I think this whole "cap in 2.5 years" idea is problematic. One of my favorite things in D&D consists of experimentation. I enjoy trying new builds out, mixing up play styles, etc. Basically, imagine how appalling it would feel if you cap'd your barbarian and got bored of playing him. Hey, just 2.5 more years until you can play a wizard of equal level. Or imagine wanting to become a blacksmith only to find out that playing as a level 20 barbarian will net you so much more, that playing as a blacksmith feels seriously counter-productive. Finally, real-time training coupled with the 2.5 years mentality are a rather large incentive to have more than one account, which to me is a rather perverse move by the developer.
Everything requires balance. You want players to be able to immerse themselves within the game world while not suffering unnecessary hindrances. Imagine if you had to clean your settlement every week in order to avoid plagues or if you had to sleep or your character would hallucinate. Usually, things that piss you off in real life won't work differently in a game, and should therefore be avoided for maximum fun (subjective, of course, but I'm willing to bet only an extremely minute percentage of gamers would find enjoyment out of sleeping for hours in a game or cleaning their houses.) On the other hand, things like mounted travel versus instant teleportation via the world map greatly adds to an online game, especially a sandbox, where businesses related to travel can develop and forge a stronger community. General physics such as momentum, gravity, inertia, acceleration, friction, etc. also make for a more believable game.
What I really don't get is how some of you use the argument: "Real-time training systems allow me to keep up with my friends, even if they play more than I do..." then go on to state that time does not equal power. Even so, I still find it incredulous to state that more options does not equate to power. Unless "leveling up" provides a series of redundant abilities (I think it's pretty obvious to say that I find this quite unlikely..), then options do indeed equate to power.
I believe your character's skills should be a by-product of the ways in which you play. If you favor a sword in combat, naturally your ability with said weapon should be better than say with a staff. This way, you focus on playing the game the way you find most enjoyable, the way the game feels most natural, not the way you PLAN will be fun. Skills should ENHANCE your play style, not determine it.
Maybe it's better to say the focus of the game isn't on character progression. Everything in the game is related to character progression. Your ability to kill, trade, socialize, produce, conquer, they all tie to character progression, making it a pivotal facet of the game, just like pretty much every RPG.
An RPG that's not about character progression? Um.. I don't think so.
<snip> True. In an online scenario, competition leads to exploitation and exploitation leads to disappointment or conformity. I'll do some brainstorming and see if I can come up with an idea to counter this issue.
But there's a psychology argument to be made on the other side as well: When I sit down to play my game, I want to have fun. Making 100 Copper Swords is not fun. It's tedious, and I hate it. It doesn't matter whether I click "Make All" and walk away to watch something on TV a la LOTRO or WoW, or whether I have to actively participate and respond to challenges a la Vanguard. Either was is maddeningly frustrating, and directly interferes with my ability to play the game. That's the thing though. You don't usually craft 100 copper swords on one sitting. You control the pace of the progression. You decide whether you want to advance more quickly or more slowly. If things get boring, you just stop crafting and go on an adventure or something. On a real-time training system, it frankly becomes a drag having to pause skills then queue new skills, then pause again, etc. etc. The "use to advance" system provides greater flexibility for people who want to control the pace of their gameplay with more freedom and immediacy.
<snip> I get your point, but I'm still really skeptical. I prefer a more realistic approach, where practice and experience leads to growth, where the player is in complete control of the speed of his progression.
So in other words, a race to cap grind system. Um.. no, not nearly. A race to cap occurs when, A.) You can grind your ass off, or B.) The only meaningful content is at cap. Neither of those need to be true in the system I propose.
<snip> I believe you missed my point. I'm not talking about doing high level content. I'm talking about starting things out. Meaning, if I log into any game, Darkfall, Runescape, etc. and say, "Hey, I want to go make some copper bars", I don't have to wait for a timer to expire before I can do so. I just grab a pickaxe, mine the ore, and I smelt it. Of course, I won't be able to smelt a Steel ore, etc., but atleast I can begin the activity without having constant breaks. Most games work like this, if I want to do something, I just grab the necessary tools and off I go. I don't need to queue up a skill, wait 15 minutes, then do whatever is it is I wanted to do in the first place.
Here's the problem with a real-time skill training system. When you feel like doing something new, you don't tell yourself, "Oh, in X minutes
Actually it is still very open ended. You can basically forge your own adventuring class, your own production class, and your own social class, choosing whichever skills you favor. The limit of total amount of skill points per sphere is necessary in a "Use to level" system, or else it becomes like Darkfall where everyone is everything (unless of course it takes really long to train something, but then it usually gets too slow and boring.) Nothing in that resembles Talent Trees from WoW. More like Skyrim, mixed with Vanguard, and with total skill point limit to make choices more meaningful.
stealthbr, could you explain what you mean about EVE's system and skills in relation to Onishi's post? I don't understand how the two relate. Onishi stated that crafting skills would lose their value if they could be trained at the same time as adventuring skills, which is true. The expression "EVE-like system" refers to the fact that skills in EVE are trained in real time, that's all.
<snip> That is true under an EVE-like skill training system. Under a "use to level" system, where mastering even one craft could take very long, this situation would be almost non-existent. Also, it is important to note that envision such a system providing a limited amount of skill points per sphere. Meaning, a character would not have the potential to be everything. The character would be able to designate a maximum value a skill would be able to reach, would be able to pause the skill's progression (using it wouldn't generate skill points), would be able to take points away from it (in case he does not like the skill and wishes to respec). This would encourage specialization and pre-planning while still allowing for generalist-type of characters.
Bingo! Vanguard has some amazing qualities and I find it surprising how other games have not borrowed some ideas.
<snip> I will tell you what I would do. My ideal system would contain 3 main spheres of advancement. The spheres would be the Adventuring Sphere, the Production Sphere, and the Social Sphere. Each sphere would contain their respective archetypes and skill trees. Player characters would be able to advance in each sphere and the progress in one sphere would not affect the progress in another.
The intent is not to equalize, but to contain that power gap so that it is not overly large. Regarding the weekend warriors, the solution is to allow the Rested state to not only quicken skill training, but also alleviate the diminishing returns. As with everything, a careful balance needs to be established. You want to discourage mindless grinding while rewarding players that really dedicate themselves to the game.
It's only purpose is to allow players that do not have a lot of playing time to keep up with others that do. From the blog: "One huge upside is that unlike almost every other MMO, your character gets better in EVE even when you're playing another game...It also levels the playing field between people who can only put in a few hours a day (or a few a week), and those who can play continuously...Finally, it encourages characters to specialize, but doesn't inflict overt penalties if the player doesn't do so."3 points made in favor, the first 2 being closely linked. Point #3 could also be said about a "level through use" system, therefore I find it redundant to acknowledge.
Please, try and remain on topic. Remember, we are discussing the Skill Training system. Anyway, here's my take. Real-time skill training provides an unnecessary time sink that does not make the game any more fun. It's only purpose is to allow players that do not have a lot of playing time to keep up with others that do. It also serves to control the rate of progression for the player characters, which I think is unnecessary to this degree, especially in a sandbox game. In relationship to those that play less and would still like to keep up with their friends, the solution is to add a form of Rest XP. Meaning, the more they stay logged out, the longer they stay Rested in-game, and the faster their skills progress. Another element that helps out a lot with this is the implementation of diminishing returns. Diminishing returns, if used correctly, basically makes grinding a less effective activity than actually playing the game in terms of progression. Not only that, diminishing returns can make it so that a player that spends hours upon hours playing the game won't be that much ahead of someone who plays considerably less.
<snip> Agreed. Simply, I prefer having the ability to dictate how fast I progress. In EVE Online, I would log in with the sole purpose of putting skills on queue, then I would log off and do something else because I had to wait for those extremely long timers to expire before I could start doing something interesting. That to me is not the definition of fun, more like a second job. The real-time based training system simply dictates progression's pace far too strictly, there's little room for wiggle. Things end up taking too long, and instead of playing to feel rewarded, I end up waiting for hours, days, months, to feel like I am getting somewhere.
Sorry about that. I had already read that blog post a while back but had forgotten about their merit badge concept. Anyway, here's another question I have: In the blog it is stated that after you gain a capstone in a certain archetype you can go on and work towards the capstone of a different archetype. Does that mean one character could have multiple capstones? Wouldn't that be unbalanced?
Hello. I began a discussion in another thread regarding skill training, but find it more appropriate to start a separate one for it. Basically, I do not like Goblinworks' idea of making use of EVE Online's time/queue-based skill training system in Pathfinder Online. I believe a system in which you gain skill level ups through actually using your skills to be superior in a variety of ways. I think of EVE's system as inferior based on multiple considerations: First, in a time-based skill training system, the character is forced to progress in a very specific pace. This is due to the nature of the system itself, as your actions have no real impact on how fast or slow your skills progress. For this reason, I believe it can lead to a discomforting position, where the player finds himself wanting to progress his skills at a certain rate but is unable to do so because the system imposes an extremely restrictive time limitation. Second, it is an artificial, job-like form of progression. Instead of training to become a better swordsman by actually grabbing a weapon and hunting monsters, the player has to wait for a timer to expire. I'm sorry, but where is the fun in that? Where is the sense of achievement when you gain that new skill point? In a system where skills are trained through use, your actions directly lead to the molding of your character. Your adventures gain weight, and slaying that extremely tough opponent gives you more than just a few pieces of gear, it actually makes your character a more experienced being. I do hope the community and Goblinworks give this thread some consideration as Pathfinder Online seems to be the game many of us have been waiting for and I can only hope it lives up to its expectations. Thank you for your time.
I just think the sense of fun, progression, and achievement are completely sucked out from skill training if you have to wait for them to train as opposed to actually making use of them. If I want to become a better swordsman, I grab a sword and go slay some monsters with it, not wait 10 hours while the skill is queued up. Where's the fun in that? Furthermore, it makes dedication an irrelevant quality to have in relationship to skill training. No more setting goals and working towards completing them. Instead, you wait for a timer to expire. Point #1 I find to be a minor issue considering Goblinworks stated there is a relatively small power gap between veterans and newcomers. Someone who does not play as much as their friends would still be able to play with them simply because they are not that much more powerful based on their skill points alone. Finally, I think it's a terrible idea for a game to stringently decide at which pace a player progresses. That should be up to the player so that the player can progress at a pace in which he is comfortable with. I had a very hard time enjoying EVE simply because skill training felt too slow. I wanted to learn things at my own pace through my usage of the skills. That way, I would have direct control over how fast my skills progressed. Also, why would you want to control the pace in which a player progresses in a sandbox game, where most of the content is created by the players themselves?
Quick question here: Why skill training over time instead of through use? It's a lot more organic and the sense of achievement is much emphasized if your character does things and you see him getting better at doing those things instead of watching a timer run out. Some may argue that skill training through use allows people to macro or try and exploit the system, but a number of measures can be implemented in order to avoid such acts. First, introduce diminishing returns. Second, make it so that anyone who is AFK can't progress in their skill training. Third, make it so that an interaction between an active player and an AFK player can't generate any skill training. Fourth, make it so that levels determine how much skill can be gained from interacting with something (a level 10 monster will provide more skill training than a lvl 2 monster). Fifth, make it so that a skill is only trained if it is successfully utilized. Meaning, if you fire a spell at a tree, it won't help your skill progress. There are many other things that one can do to avoid such practices but these were some examples to give a general idea of my argument.
For over a decade, we have been presented again and again with the same, hotkey-based combat system in these games. I would have to say that a significant portion of the MMO community has grown out of this unexciting, archaic gameplay. Please, Goblinworks, maintain your vision of a revolutionary approach throughout your entire game. Do not take the safe way out. You can make something good, or you can try and forge a legend, something truly amazing and unprecedented. |