·English·Theme
- Forums
- Final Fantasy XIV
- General Discussion
- I think ARR will succeed.
I think ARR will succeed.Follow
If you release something so difficult it takes you ten times to beat it, though, that's enough to make the majority of people rage-quit. XI got away with it, but no other MMO can.
catwho wrote:
If you release something so difficult it takes you ten times to beat it, though, that's enough to make the majority of people rage-quit. XI got away with it, but no other MMO can.
That's why you have normal modes and hard modes. But this idea that people will just ragequit when things are challenging is mostly incorrect. At least, people are no more prone to ragequit from repeated defeats than from repeated victories with no reward.
It's not as if every encounter in the game needs to have the difficulty tuned up to be very difficult. We're just talking about those elite items. And you also can't look at it through the lens of a game like FFXI. When a mob in FFXI kills you 10 times, it's probably more because the RNG, your party configuration, or your party as a whole screwed you over. The idea isn't that the mob is going to kill you 10 times statistically, but that it might take you 10 times to rally the skill needed to overcome the challenge. And if you're really good, you win on the first try. Then you move on to a more difficult encounter with better rewards.
And I would argue that FFXI didn't get away with it at all. Many people left FFXI exactly because of the **** drop rates and the punishing game design. They left in droves.
Kachi wrote:
So you understand that if they made the content more difficult, it would last longer, right? You seem to have answered your own question.
Your claim was that Triple A studios could support and maintain a player base with release content up to the point where an expansion wouldbe released....
None of the games mentioned have been able to do that, for X or Y reasons, they have not been able to do it, Swotor for example had the most content towards leveling up, but at endgame, it was barren, Rift was a mix bag, and GW2 had the most content across the board, but easy as hell, so therefore none of them where able to hold their audience until an expansion was released....
So no ?
catwho wrote:
If you release something so difficult it takes you ten times to beat it, though, that's enough to make the majority of people rage-quit. XI got away with it, but no other MMO can.
Hell, 1.0 leve quests were insanely difficult for a number of reason (like not knowing what difficulty to select, as 3 stars was good for one leve and much too hard for the next) and not being able to change difficulty at first, etc.
Rage-quitting, oh there was much of.
Ostia wrote:
Kachi wrote:
So you understand that if they made the content more difficult, it would last longer, right? You seem to have answered your own question.
Your claim was that Triple A studios could support and maintain a player base with release content up to the point where an expansion wouldbe released....
None of the games mentioned have been able to do that, for X or Y reasons, they have not been able to do it, Swotor for example had the most content towards leveling up, but at endgame, it was barren, Rift was a mix bag, and GW2 had the most content across the board, but easy as hell, so therefore none of them where able to hold their audience until an expansion was released....
So no ?
These games haven't done that but have been ABLE to do that. As you note, I can count the number of times I failed at any of the content on GW2 on one hand, for example. It's fast because it's so easy. If the content were made harder, it would take much longer to complete.
I don't know, it seems pretty obvious to me. Let's say you have a 5 mile road called Final Fantasy Street, and I tell you that you have to walk it. Meanwhile, I have a 50 mile road called Future MMO Boulevard, but I'm driving a race car. I'll surely finish before you, but that doesn't mean that I don't have 10 times as much road. If I had to walk my road, then it would take quite a while.
Even if you can't grasp this, you can easily grasp the fact that games are able to release with much more content than they could before, including much more content than games like FFXIV, or even the initial releases of FFXI, WoW, etc...
Louiscool wrote:
catwho wrote:
If you release something so difficult it takes you ten times to beat it, though, that's enough to make the majority of people rage-quit. XI got away with it, but no other MMO can.
Hell, 1.0 leve quests were insanely difficult for a number of reason (like not knowing what difficulty to select, as 3 stars was good for one leve and much too hard for the next) and not being able to change difficulty at first, etc.
Rage-quitting, oh there was much of.
Players will rage-quit over fake difficulty, which includes things like bad UI and problems that can't be solved with their own reasoning. Not knowing which difficulty to select because of inconsistency in the ratings would be a prime example of this. People said the same things about the quests in FFXI, which gave almost no direction towards the next step, forcing you to look online for the answer.
Players have an intuitive sense of fairness when it comes to game design. When the design doesn't seem fair, that upsets them. They're losing for reasons outside of their control. If it's fair but very difficult, they generally deal with that just fine.
Quote:
Players will rage-quit over fake difficulty
Translation: Bulls**t
Players will rage-quit over bulls**t. (though many people rage-quit Demon's/Dark souls and most of that is not bulls**t)
Louiscool wrote:
Quote:
Players will rage-quit over fake difficulty
Translation: Bulls**t
Players will rage-quit over bulls**t. (though many people rage-quit Demon's/Dark souls and most of that is not bulls**t)
"Fake difficulty" is a very common term in the game design world, not something I made up. But yes, it's basically things which players see as "bullsh*t." See: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FakeDifficulty for a synopsis.
Regarding Dark/Demon's Souls, players will also rage-quit over punishment. No surprise really--you punish someone for playing your game, and eventually they'll stop.
Edited, Mar 11th 2013 7:41am by Kachi
Kachi wrote:
Louiscool wrote:
Quote:
Players will rage-quit over fake difficulty
Translation: Bulls**t
Players will rage-quit over bulls**t. (though many people rage-quit Demon's/Dark souls and most of that is not bulls**t)
"Fake difficulty" is a very common term in the game design world, not something I made up. But yes, it's basically things which players see as "bullsh*t." See: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FakeDifficulty for a synopsis.
Regarding Dark/Demon's Souls, players will also rage-quit over punishment. No surprise really--you punish someone for playing your game, and eventually they'll stop.
Edited, Mar 11th 2013 7:41am by Kachi
Ha, I wasn't saying what you said was bull, I was just saying what I call it.
Sometimes referred to as DumbBullsh*tSauce
Kachi wrote:
Ostia wrote:
Kachi wrote:
So you understand that if they made the content more difficult, it would last longer, right? You seem to have answered your own question.
Your claim was that Triple A studios could support and maintain a player base with release content up to the point where an expansion wouldbe released....
None of the games mentioned have been able to do that, for X or Y reasons, they have not been able to do it, Swotor for example had the most content towards leveling up, but at endgame, it was barren, Rift was a mix bag, and GW2 had the most content across the board, but easy as hell, so therefore none of them where able to hold their audience until an expansion was released....
So no ?
These games haven't done that but have been ABLE to do that. As you note, I can count the number of times I failed at any of the content on GW2 on one hand, for example. It's fast because it's so easy. If the content were made harder, it would take much longer to complete.
I don't know, it seems pretty obvious to me. Let's say you have a 5 mile road called Final Fantasy Street, and I tell you that you have to walk it. Meanwhile, I have a 50 mile road called Future MMO Boulevard, but I'm driving a race car. I'll surely finish before you, but that doesn't mean that I don't have 10 times as much road. If I had to walk my road, then it would take quite a while.
Even if you can't grasp this, you can easily grasp the fact that games are able to release with much more content than they could before, including much more content than games like FFXIV, or even the initial releases of FFXI, WoW, etc...
Louiscool wrote:
catwho wrote:
If you release something so difficult it takes you ten times to beat it, though, that's enough to make the majority of people rage-quit. XI got away with it, but no other MMO can.
Hell, 1.0 leve quests were insanely difficult for a number of reason (like not knowing what difficulty to select, as 3 stars was good for one leve and much too hard for the next) and not being able to change difficulty at first, etc.
Rage-quitting, oh there was much of.
Players will rage-quit over fake difficulty, which includes things like bad UI and problems that can't be solved with their own reasoning. Not knowing which difficulty to select because of inconsistency in the ratings would be a prime example of this. People said the same things about the quests in FFXI, which gave almost no direction towards the next step, forcing you to look online for the answer.
Players have an intuitive sense of fairness when it comes to game design. When the design doesn't seem fair, that upsets them. They're losing for reasons outside of their control. If it's fair but very difficult, they generally deal with that just fine.
Kachi wrote:
Ostia wrote:
Kachi wrote:
So you understand that if they made the content more difficult, it would last longer, right? You seem to have answered your own question.
Your claim was that Triple A studios could support and maintain a player base with release content up to the point where an expansion wouldbe released....
None of the games mentioned have been able to do that, for X or Y reasons, they have not been able to do it, Swotor for example had the most content towards leveling up, but at endgame, it was barren, Rift was a mix bag, and GW2 had the most content across the board, but easy as hell, so therefore none of them where able to hold their audience until an expansion was released....
So no ?
These games haven't done that but have been ABLE to do that. As you note, I can count the number of times I failed at any of the content on GW2 on one hand, for example. It's fast because it's so easy. If the content were made harder, it would take much longer to complete.
I don't know, it seems pretty obvious to me. Let's say you have a 5 mile road called Final Fantasy Street, and I tell you that you have to walk it. Meanwhile, I have a 50 mile road called Future MMO Boulevard, but I'm driving a race car. I'll surely finish before you, but that doesn't mean that I don't have 10 times as much road. If I had to walk my road, then it would take quite a while.
Even if you can't grasp this, you can easily grasp the fact that games are able to release with much more content than they could before, including much more content than games like FFXIV, or even the initial releases of FFXI, WoW, etc...
Louiscool wrote:
catwho wrote:
If you release something so difficult it takes you ten times to beat it, though, that's enough to make the majority of people rage-quit. XI got away with it, but no other MMO can.
Hell, 1.0 leve quests were insanely difficult for a number of reason (like not knowing what difficulty to select, as 3 stars was good for one leve and much too hard for the next) and not being able to change difficulty at first, etc.
Rage-quitting, oh there was much of.
Players will rage-quit over fake difficulty, which includes things like bad UI and problems that can't be solved with their own reasoning. Not knowing which difficulty to select because of inconsistency in the ratings would be a prime example of this. People said the same things about the quests in FFXI, which gave almost no direction towards the next step, forcing you to look online for the answer.
Players have an intuitive sense of fairness when it comes to game design. When the design doesn't seem fair, that upsets them. They're losing for reasons outside of their control. If it's fair but very difficult, they generally deal with that just fine.
Rift, Swotor and GW2 did not release with more content that vanilla wow... And Both FFXI and Wow released with more content than EQ...So companies have always been able to release games with more content that their predecesors, they just have not done it, because "Excuses"
You know, it's not that hard to highlight a duplicated set of text and delete it. It's not unlike removing quote towers...
If it is to succeed, add Blue Maje job. Heck the world could be reborn in the ashes of the blue mages who rise. Like some people pointed out they look over jobs liek DRG and are excited to play. Blu is like a moster master of secrets job that would capture me and I am sure many others.
Quote:
Ha, I wasn't saying what you said was bull, I was just saying what I call it.
I got that, though in your defense, I considered that my reply might not convey that I understood what you were saying and decided, "Oh well." I figured we'd just have an exchange like this one where you said you weren't antagonizing me and I replied that I didn't perceive any offense. So, kinda my bad, really.
Quote:
Rift, Swotor and GW2 did not release with more content that vanilla wow...
Have you actually played these games? I can't account for Rift, but SWTOR and GW2 definitely released with more content than vanilla WoW. They just didn't pace their content as well.
Kachi wrote:
Quote:
Ha, I wasn't saying what you said was bull, I was just saying what I call it.
I got that, though in your defense, I considered that my reply might not convey that I understood what you were saying and decided, "Oh well." I figured we'd just have an exchange like this one where you said you weren't antagonizing me and I replied that I didn't perceive any offense. So, kinda my bad, really.
Quote:
Rift, Swotor and GW2 did not release with more content that vanilla wow...
Have you actually played these games? I can't account for Rift, but SWTOR and GW2 definitely released with more content than vanilla WoW. They just didn't pace their content as well.
Kachi wrote:
Quote:
Ha, I wasn't saying what you said was bull, I was just saying what I call it.
I got that, though in your defense, I considered that my reply might not convey that I understood what you were saying and decided, "Oh well." I figured we'd just have an exchange like this one where you said you weren't antagonizing me and I replied that I didn't perceive any offense. So, kinda my bad, really.
Quote:
Rift, Swotor and GW2 did not release with more content that vanilla wow...
Have you actually played these games? I can't account for Rift, but SWTOR and GW2 definitely released with more content than vanilla WoW. They just didn't pace their content as well.
I actually played all 3, Rift, Swotor and GW2 did not lauch with more content than vanilla wow.... Did you play vanilla WOW ?
GW2 has 9 Dungeons, Vanilla WOW had 29 that is 20 more istances... GW2 Has 0 Raids, Vanilla WOW had 7, that is 7 more raids.... GW2 has 25 Zones, Vanilla WOW had 41 Zones, that is 16 more zones.... GW2 has PVP, WvsW and some other **** i never tried, Vanilla WOW had 3 battlegrounds and PVP, GW2 has more content than vanilla WOW on PVP.
Also Everquest had 1200 Quest by the time WOW went into Alpha, by the time Vanilla WOW launched it launched with 2600 Quests.... Seriously doubt that GW2 has more than 2600 quests with an inferior number of zones, dungeons and raids.
Also Everquest had 1200 Quest by the time WOW went into Alpha, by the time Vanilla WOW launched it launched with 2600 Quests.... Seriously doubt that GW2 has more than 2600 quests with an inferior number of zones, dungeons and raids.
Er, I guess if you're not going to count any of the dynamic events, mission branches, etc. And at a certain point, I don't count another 20 "Keel ten moose" as 20 more quests. Hell, you might as well count repeatable quests and just say that it has "Infinity quests!"
Ok.. Vanilla WoW didn't launch with all that crap.
Battlegrounds were added later, most of the raids were added later (I believe it launched with Molton Core and, like, Stratholme).
Everquest having 1200 quests when WoW went into alpha is meaningless when you're talking about what a game launched with. WoW also had 2 factions, which is 1 more than EQ, why not mention that? WoW was a quest-centric game. The entire point was to quest your way to greatness, so of course they launched with a ton of them.
GW2 has an entirely different questing system than WoW so comparing those directly isn't entirely fair either. GW2 and SWTOR also have story quests that lead your character along a developing story arc. SWTOR has 8 of these, GW2 has (I believe) 5 with some variants based on character creation choices, that's 8 and 5 more than WoW has EVER had.
You need to define what you're talking about when you're talking about content or your point makes no sense.
Battlegrounds were added later, most of the raids were added later (I believe it launched with Molton Core and, like, Stratholme).
Everquest having 1200 quests when WoW went into alpha is meaningless when you're talking about what a game launched with. WoW also had 2 factions, which is 1 more than EQ, why not mention that? WoW was a quest-centric game. The entire point was to quest your way to greatness, so of course they launched with a ton of them.
GW2 has an entirely different questing system than WoW so comparing those directly isn't entirely fair either. GW2 and SWTOR also have story quests that lead your character along a developing story arc. SWTOR has 8 of these, GW2 has (I believe) 5 with some variants based on character creation choices, that's 8 and 5 more than WoW has EVER had.
You need to define what you're talking about when you're talking about content or your point makes no sense.
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
Ostia wrote:
GW2 has 9 Dungeons, Vanilla WOW had 29 that is 20 more istances... GW2 Has 0 Raids, Vanilla WOW had 7, that is 7 more raids.... GW2 has 25 Zones, Vanilla WOW had 41 Zones, that is 16 more zones.... GW2 has PVP, WvsW and some other sh*t i never tried, Vanilla WOW had 3 battlegrounds and PVP, GW2 has more content than vanilla WOW on PVP.
Also Everquest had 1200 Quest by the time WOW went into Alpha, by the time Vanilla WOW launched it launched with 2600 Quests.... Seriously doubt that GW2 has more than 2600 quests with an inferior number of zones, dungeons and raids.
Also Everquest had 1200 Quest by the time WOW went into Alpha, by the time Vanilla WOW launched it launched with 2600 Quests.... Seriously doubt that GW2 has more than 2600 quests with an inferior number of zones, dungeons and raids.
Vanilla WoW launched with 15 instances, Maraudon and Dire Maul were added later. There were no battlegrounds when WoW launched, Alterac Valley and Warsong Gulch were added in patch 1.5 with Arathi Basin coming in with 1.7. There are also only 4 classic WoW raids, none of which were out at launch; Blackwing Lair - 1.6, Zul'Gurub - 1.7, Ahn'Qiraj - 1.9, and Naxx - 1.11.
http://www.wowwiki.com/Patches/1.x
Edit: Callinon beat me. Completely forgot about Molton Core and Onyxia's Lair which were available at launch.
Edited, Mar 12th 2013 1:00am by Seraphaniim
Thanks; I thought those numbers sounded ridiculously off, but couldn't be bothered to look it up.
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Ok.. Vanilla WoW didn't launch with all that crap.
Battlegrounds were added later, most of the raids were added later (I believe it launched with Molton Core and, like, Stratholme).
Everquest having 1200 quests when WoW went into alpha is meaningless when you're talking about what a game launched with. WoW also had 2 factions, which is 1 more than EQ, why not mention that? WoW was a quest-centric game. The entire point was to quest your way to greatness, so of course they launched with a ton of them.
GW2 has an entirely different questing system than WoW so comparing those directly isn't entirely fair either. GW2 and SWTOR also have story quests that lead your character along a developing story arc. SWTOR has 8 of these, GW2 has (I believe) 5 with some variants based on character creation choices, that's 8 and 5 more than WoW has EVER had.
You need to define what you're talking about when you're talking about content or your point makes no sense.
Battlegrounds were added later, most of the raids were added later (I believe it launched with Molton Core and, like, Stratholme).
Everquest having 1200 quests when WoW went into alpha is meaningless when you're talking about what a game launched with. WoW also had 2 factions, which is 1 more than EQ, why not mention that? WoW was a quest-centric game. The entire point was to quest your way to greatness, so of course they launched with a ton of them.
GW2 has an entirely different questing system than WoW so comparing those directly isn't entirely fair either. GW2 and SWTOR also have story quests that lead your character along a developing story arc. SWTOR has 8 of these, GW2 has (I believe) 5 with some variants based on character creation choices, that's 8 and 5 more than WoW has EVER had.
You need to define what you're talking about when you're talking about content or your point makes no sense.
Vanilla WOW is defined as WOW pre-BC.... Hence Vanilla..... Also battlegrounds where added 2 months later..... LOL! Also EQ was a quest centric game for it's time, just because WOW outdone it, does it not mean that it was not the wow of it's time
And yeah those story arcs you mention are present in wow, just different presentation and all, unless you are gonna tell me WOW had no story and GW2 actually had more content than vanill wow lol (Which btw it does not even beats "Launch WOW" Seraphaniim wrote:
[quote=Ostia]GW2 has 9 Dungeons, Vanilla WOW had 29 that is 20 more istances... GW2 Has 0 Raids, Vanilla WOW had 7, that is 7 more raids.... GW2 has 25 Zones, Vanilla WOW had 41 Zones, that is 16 more zones.... GW2 has PVP, WvsW and some other sh*t i never tried, Vanilla WOW had 3 battlegrounds and PVP, GW2 has more content than vanilla WOW on PVP.
Also Everquest had 1200 Quest by the time WOW went into Alpha, by the time Vanilla WOW launched it launched with 2600 Quests.... Seriously doubt that GW2 has more than 2600 quests with an inferior number of zones, dungeons and raids.
Also Everquest had 1200 Quest by the time WOW went into Alpha, by the time Vanilla WOW launched it launched with 2600 Quests.... Seriously doubt that GW2 has more than 2600 quests with an inferior number of zones, dungeons and raids.
Please learn what the term Vanilla WOW means then correct me noob
Kachi wrote:
Quote:
Ha, I wasn't saying what you said was bull, I was just saying what I call it.
I got that, though in your defense, I considered that my reply might not convey that I understood what you were saying and decided, "Oh well." I figured we'd just have an exchange like this one where you said you weren't antagonizing me and I replied that I didn't perceive any offense. So, kinda my bad, really.
That's so 'meta' of you.
Oh no! A statement of ambiguous intent! This was not anticipated in my calculations!
Quote:
Vanilla WOW is defined as WOW pre-BC.... Hence Vanilla..... Also battlegrounds where added 2 months later..... LOL! Also EQ was a quest centric game for it's time, just because WOW outdone it, does it not mean that it was not the wow of it's time And yeah those story arcs you mention are present in wow, just different presentation and all, unless you are gonna tell me WOW had no story and GW2 actually had more content than vanill wow lol (Which btw it does not even beats "Launch WOW"
Fair enough, because of your post immediately above that, I assumed you were talking about WoW at launch rather than WoW prior to its first expansion.
In that case though, don't you think you should wait for those other three games to put out expansions so you can do a real comparison? I believe only Rift has done that at this point.
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
That IS what we were talking about. He's just changing gears as convenient to his argument.
Ostia wrote:
Please learn what the term Vanilla WOW means then correct me noob
As other have pointed out, we were assuming you were talking about WoW at launch. Maybe you should consider making your arguments a little more definitive in the future so as to not confuse people?
Edit for prettiness
Edited, Mar 12th 2013 11:42am by Seraphaniim
Recent Visitors: 96
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (96)
- Forums
- Final Fantasy XIV
- General Discussion
- I think ARR will succeed.
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC