Apr 3rd 2012 9:01AM If I really want PvP I usually play some type of FPS, currently TF2 as I haven't picked up Battlefield 3 yet. Even TF2 seems to be the old Team Fortress mixed with WoW. The invisible spies that one-shot backstab and the healer pally-bubbles are just ridiculous. So when I choose to play MMO style PvP it's to slow down, as the pace isn't as fast in MMO combat. BUT, the constant stuns, fears, and interrupts turns it all into a waiting game of "when do I actually get to use an ability" or just sitting here watching someone kill my character without being able to respond. Trinkets have a cooldown you know. In a FPS, if a rocket blows me up or someone gets a clean shot out of a window that I didn't notice, then at least I was mobile and active. GC wrote some time back that being stunlocked was not fun. Seems the higher ups disagreed with him. HOPEFULLY one of the things that WoW "borrows" from a certain other game, in addition to AoE looting, is the resolve bar where all CCs share a common diminishing return. As it is now, it's the one doing the stunlocking that's having fun.
In addition, there's the graveyard waits. It seems that devs say something like, "hey lets put the respawn right on top of the cap point so they can rush right back in". Then they say, "oh the offense has a really hard time with so many people popping up on top of them to defend, so we'll put in a delay for respawning to balance that". The result is, you get to sit there for up to half a minute either doing nothing, eating a sandwich, or thinking about all the important or at least more interesting things you could be doing besides sitting in a graveyard waiting for a respawn timer. Again I reference the golden age of gaming, where back in Team Fortress we had these long hallways and such to run down, or big courtyards to cross, that made up for the instant respawns and let us remain active. Actively playing the game, instead of hiding or running away, should not be punished by getting a long visit to the graveyard, while the guy hiding in the back talking trash continues to brag about his deaths to killing blows ratio.
There were references to the old Assault model for Unreal Tournament, which are basically the capture point maps like Strand of the Ancients but without the vehicles. Those map designs didn't have people sitting around playing defense. Sitting waiting for a random size group, or some invisible backstabber, to show up is boring. Trying to push back and forth at a given chokepoint while moving towards or away from the capture points is a much more active game design. Think of that damn bridge in AV for an example of a choke point. And please, for heavens sake, everyone stop making carry-the-flag maps so some attention seeking infant will stop holding the flag and running around like an idiot.
Mar 30th 2012 11:21AM Beyond a certain point complexity becomes a burden. That point varies depending on the person in question. However, making a game "more accessable to the casual gamer" appears to be a fairly bad decision as far as subscription numbers goes. The current sinking ship of WoW tells me that people who get the simpler "not like a job" gameplay get bored with that game style rather quickly. The current issue with Cata seems to be that the "hard mode" gamers of vanilla and early BC left during the Wrath AoE fest and then the "pull faster n00b!!!" crowd hated the change back to a more challenging game style. Blizzard's ultimate failure is trying to please everyone at the same time.
GC recently did a blog where he joked about a LFR loot style people requested was "give me what I want so I never have to do this boss again and then ask when new conent will be available". Not an exact quote I assure you, but I reference this as an example of the "I just want to see stuff and get nice things" crowd. That crowd also tends to wander off to another game and take their money with them.
Also, as for character creation, one of the biggest complaints during the SWTOR development was a LACK of character creation options. The issue that comes in with complexity of character creation is not in the sheer number of options, but rather the min/maxing crowd that refuses to have anything less than the most optimized character possible while drawing from multiple sources. The Elitist Jerks site is a fine example of OCD in min/maxing. It's also a fine example of a complete lack of understanding of statistics and probability.
TL;DR Hard mode and easy mode are for different people. You can't expect everyone to like both. For a business trying to make a profit, particularly a publicly traded company, the question is, which crowd will you make more money with?
Mar 9th 2012 8:05AM @tenfootgoatman One of the WoW developers said that there were many console gamers coming into WoW that had difficulty even adapting to the wasd movement keys. It is my opinion that those same console gamers are used to turning on cheat codes and walking through a game just to see things without having any challenge.
MMO PvP on the other hand seems to be the focus of people who find FPS too fast or "twitch" based. Most of the MMO PvP nuts in WoW I've talked to over the last 5 years said they hated FPS. Yet the MMO industry focuses heavily on a niche market in a vain attempt to "make everyone happy all of the time".
I'd love to see WoW have PVE servers that had NO PvP options, the opposite of a PvP realm, just to seperate a certain mentality from the rest. Really that's the model I'd go with for a MMO of my own, PvP being a completely seperate set of mini-games with no consideration of player character level or gear, and giving them no "lore" rationalization to grief each other.
Dec 27th 2011 1:07PM It isn't about keeping YOU, as a customer. It's about keeping a high NET NUMBER of customers. A Blizzard dev I think it was said that there were a lot more people who used to play WoW than are playing WoW now. You can't expect everyone who starts playing a game to keep playing it. The general idea is to keep many new players coming into the game as possible to balance out those that leave. But I suppose trying to get that NET accounts balance across to people who are convinced the world revolves around THEM is futile.
Aug 2nd 2011 7:25PM FrostPaw said:
"Choices you can retract really aren't choices."...
"if you need a tank companion for gameplay nessecity and you killed your companion tank simply allow the player to construct a droid or hire a mercanary that fills the same roll albeit without a companion storyline."
So essentially you're saying that killing companions is a meaningful choice, but it shouldn't have any impact on the game because you can easily replace them with no hassle? If they're easily replaced, then how is killing them a meaningful choice?
Aug 2nd 2011 7:20PM "However, I do believe that as far as video games are concerned, that if a game developer is going to proclaim that its game has real choices, then the ending of the game should be quite different, depending on the choices made."
You said "the ending of the game". SWTOR does not have an end. MMO games do not end. You cannot "beat the game", because the game does not end. You cannot have meaningful roleplay (DM'd D&D games for about 10 years) in a MMO, because the game is shared and is not a single player game that has an end. I think too many people see this as KotR Online, which it's not. World of Warcraft is not exactly like the Warcraft RTS games. You can't kill the king and he stays dead, because WoW is a MMO.
As far as SWTOR, it was a choice between taking your ability to kill companions and such and hearing complaints about that, or not letting you kill your companions and hearing complaints about that. Far too many people are more worried about being denied the ability to do something than why they were.