As far as character building… Ok so you stated there are 33 different builds in WoW? So you and a million other people have probably built the exact same toon. Yeah… that’s diverse. There literally are hundreds of builds on NWN 1, they are distinct, and that it multiplied exponentially by the diversity of game worlds, and how they handle them each. There is really no comparison here. I can’t believe I am even indulging you by repeating myself on this. You really get off on arguing don’t you? No thanks… I have had enough of that crap. Laz
No, actually. There are 33 different specializations. Each class has three routes they can go. For example, the Paladin can go with Holy, in which case he's going to focus on healing, Retribution, where he's focusing on Damage, or Protection, where he's focusing on defense and tanking. Each has a distinct playstyle, but they all share elements of the Paladin class in common (which means there's significant differences between, say, a DPS Paladin and a DPS Warrior).
Within each specialization, you have many talents that change how your character plays. These are pretty similar to feats. Some of these will optimize for a particular ability (giving more damage or reducing cooldowns on a particular attack), while others will be completely new attacks. There are exponentially more possible builds than characters that have ever been made.
That's not to say that WoW is more complex (or deeper) than NWN. They're both complex games, but the systems cannot be compared side-by-side (certainly not by counting up possible builds, anyway).
That’s my opinion, and there is nothing wrong with me stating it. Yes I could have been nicer about it, but I wasn’t… get over it. I have already apologized for offending anyone, I am not going to grovel and beg forgivness.
I don't care about or accept your apology, because you've basically said "Yeah, you're all idiots...sorry if you're offended that I think that."
Lazarus Magni wrote...
As far as character building… Ok so you stated there are 33 different builds in WoW? So you and a million other people have probably built the exact same toon. Yeah… that’s diverse. There literally are hundreds of builds on NWN 1, they are distinct, and that it multiplied exponentially by the diversity of game worlds, and how they handle them each.
Read that brief article on depth versus complexity and valid choices.
I will grant you that the rules for building characters can vastly differ on different worlds, so you have to relearn the system for each PW. That doesn't automatically make it a good thing.
Pstemarie wrote...
You guys have been going back and forth so much its really unclear to see what the whole point of this conversation has become. Therefore, I went back to the OP...
Basically boils down to...
1, WoW and other P2P MMOs suck 2, NWN is awesome and we need another game like it
I'll agree with the second statement but not the first.
Pstemarie wrote...
I hear where you're coming from, but I can't say I entirely agree anymore. Since this topic began - and MM got me thinking about things - I decided to try out a few of these MMORPG games. I wasn't too fond of WoW - too much repetition and a lot of repeat traveling across areas just to complete simple quests (something I really HATE about most of the NWN modules I've played).
I take it by your statement that you mean you tried WoW within the last week or so?
I'm puzzled because they just revamped the 1-60 content this last expansion and should have fixed the quests that have you run back and forth across the entire area to complete a simple quest. Do you happen to recall any examples?
Squatting Monk wrote...
With the PRC, yeah, it easily has more than WoW. I count 44 Base classes. With PrCs, it's even more.
EDIT: The PRC ups the number of prestige classes to 168.
The number of (prestige) classes isn't what I'm referencing, nor the number of possible variants. I'm talking about equally valid choices. For example, I think everyone here would agree that a 40 fighter is definitely an inferior build compared to one with weapon master, dwarven defender, rogue, or other levels mixed in. Other than a desire to have an inferior character for whatever reason, there is no reason (by default, at least) to go 40 fighter.
In other words, if I asked you what the most powerful builds on a given server were, I'd expect to hear a dozen or two at most listed, even with the PRC. Everything else would be worse, even though it might be playable. But there would be no reason to pick them other than flavor because you're deliberately handicapping yourself.
Squatting Monk wrote...
<DnD 4e stuff>
I think 4e would translate amazingly well into online gameplay, but I'd rather not lose the depth of options that 3e allowed casters.
Fair enough on the 4e stuff.
Out of curiosity, what depth do you see in 3e for casters (complexity, sure)? In my experience, it amounted to figuring out the best spell to use in a situation and spamming it. When you run out, use the next best spell. Oftentimes composing of casting 24-32 IGMSes in a row, maybe with an occasional Disjuction or Bigby.
Squatting Monk wrote...
That's not to say that WoW is more complex (or deeper) than NWN. They're both complex games, but the systems cannot be compared side-by-side (certainly not by counting up possible builds, anyway).
NWN is more complex when it comes to character *building* for sure, especially when you count custom content, but I don't think it's *deeper.* And I think it's far more difficult to actually *play* a WoW character by far.
Side note (directed to anyone/everyone): what's with the desire to have a unique build or a large number of builds? Cookie cutter builds exist for a reason, namely that they're optimized and the best at what they do. If you were making a character, would you pick something inferior just to be different?
Modifié par MagicalMaster, 01 septembre 2012 - 12:39 .
buffed: There's also still feedback from players who say the talent system has been dumbed down and that its former complexity is gone. What would you say to those players? Street: We really believe in the principle of "simple to learn, hard to master" -- by which we mean that we like the rules to be pretty easy to understand and then have a lot of depth behind the scenes and a lot of ways for players to consider "Oh, I can use this talent in this situation and this ability here". So they can explore that and demonstrate mastery of their class in that way. We don't think it's the right design to have very complicated rules that players struggle to understand. And the truth is that most of our players didn't experiment a lot with the talent trees anyway. They would just go online to check or ask their friends which talents they should choose. So it was hard to learn and easy to master which is kind of the worst game design to have.
Modifié par MagicalMaster, 01 septembre 2012 - 12:54 .
The number of (prestige) classes isn't what I'm referencing, nor the number of possible variants. I'm talking about equally valid choices. For example, I think everyone here would agree that a 40 fighter is definitely an inferior build compared to one with weapon master, dwarven defender, rogue, or other levels mixed in. Other than a desire to have an inferior character for whatever reason, there is no reason (by default, at least) to go 40 fighter.
In other words, if I asked you what the most powerful builds on a given server were, I'd expect to hear a dozen or two at most listed, even with the PRC. Everything else would be worse, even though it might be playable. But there would be no reason to pick them other than flavor because you're deliberately handicapping yourself.
Well, yeah, but that's going to be true regardless of the ruleset you use. Unless the game is insanely balanced, there's going to be a few builds that outshine the others.
WoW has a set environment with which which you can judge your build's effectiveness. NWN doesn't, really. While you can run the math to see if build A is more optimized for damage than build B, whether or not a build is viable is largely subjective, and often inseparable from the environment in which it is played.
Out of curiosity, what depth do you see in 3e for casters (complexity, sure)? In my experience, it amounted to figuring out the best spell to use in a situation and spamming it. When you run out, use the next best spell. Oftentimes composing of casting 24-32 IGMSes in a row, maybe with an occasional Disjuction or Bigby.
I like the idea of being able to cast many different types of spells, but you're right. I haven't seen breadth of tactics in practice. I remember players on the old server I played on lamenting that they wanted to play a different style of caster but that spamming IGMS outshined everything.
This is where NWN's customization can make things better. You can change the balance by customizing the spells, or you can design your module so as to reward clever spell use (though that's easier said than done). I'd like to see more discussion on how to do this.
Side note (directed to anyone/everyone): what's with the desire to have a unique build or a large number of builds? Cookie cutter builds exist for a reason, namely that they're optimized and the best at what they do. If you were making a character, would you pick something inferior just to be different?
I think it goes back to what I said about NWN building for flavor. You want a character that feels fresh and original, not necessarily one that has unique capabilities. (I think this is more true in an RP setting than elsewhere. YMMV)
buffed: There's also still feedback from players who say the talent system has been dumbed down and that its former complexity is gone. What would you say to those players? Street: We really believe in the principle of "simple to learn, hard to master" -- by which we mean that we like the rules to be pretty easy to understand and then have a lot of depth behind the scenes and a lot of ways for players to consider "Oh, I can use this talent in this situation and this ability here". So they can explore that and demonstrate mastery of their class in that way. We don't think it's the right design to have very complicated rules that players struggle to understand. And the truth is that most of our players didn't experiment a lot with the talent trees anyway. They would just go online to check or ask their friends which talents they should choose. So it was hard to learn and easy to master which is kind of the worst game design to have.
QFT. I like systems that are intuitive. I wanna pick it up and play it without being penalized for being a n00b. But I also like systems that let me continue to learn and improve my play. It feels good to know you've conquered a complex system, to look back and find you're better than you once were.
Modifié par Squatting Monk, 01 septembre 2012 - 01:14 .
And wow MM, you still can't stop trying to put words in my mouth or misrepresent my intent.
@ Pstemarie Actually the topic got a lot more involved, and complex than the OP. But the constructive dialog I tried to start sadly got drowned out by MM getting stuck on one thing.
Pstemarie wrote... Then I gave Everquest II a spin and was quite surprised that I actually enjoyed it as much as NWN. The graphics are pretty decent and the interface is fairly easy to use and is like NWN in a lot of ways. However, it is a pay-to-play game but I wouldn't call it a "pay-to-win" game. Oddly enough I found myself not too distraught over its pay-to-play format. Unlike WoW, EQ2 doesn't have a monthly subscription. You pay a nominal fee or extra content - e.g. DLC (class packs, gear, race packs) that is unlocked when you buy it. There were also a couple of expansions listed in there as well.
Overall the format used by EQ2 is more digestable to me than a monthly fee to play a game. I can't really say why I find it more agreeable, but I do. Maybe its because the money I put out is up to me and when I do put out money I get something tangible (at least IMO) to me.
Actually, everquest 2 is not considered Pay-to-Play. The payment system you are describing is typical of the Free-to-Play model.
Obviously no MMO is completely free. In the end the devs need to get paid, after all. I suppose it might be possible to make an MMO that was ad driven, but that would suck IMO.
The two current payment models are "Monthly Subscription", or "P2P" (like WoW), and "Transaction Driven", or "F2P" (Like EQ2).
I also play MMOs, from time to time, and enjoy them. I have accounts for Lord of the Rings Online, and Star Trek Online. Both have similar F2P payment styles as EQ2.
The reason you find the F2P payment model less objectionable than the P2P is because: 1) You are very likely paying much less in the long run to keep your account. There is usually an initial investment of 20 bucks or so (to unlock inventory and bank slots, remove wealth caps, etc) and from time to time you need to throw another fin or two at the game (to remove level caps, unlock new areas, buy vanity items, etc) but in the long run your costs tend to be lower. 2) You are only paying for the content you use. 3) You won't be charged to not play. You can choose to take a few weeks (or months, or years) off from playing without having to go through the hassle of cancelling your payment and without having to worry about your housing decaying. Finally, and maybe most importantly, you still have the luxury of just spontaniously firing up the game whenever you want without having to deal with restarting your billing (and without running the risk of rate increases).
For the record, I'm not saying that everone who plays P2P MMOs is stupid. I don't think anyone has said that outright, although LM might have stepped over that line (sheep are kinda dumb). But I digress... I do think it's stupid to play P2P MMOs at the current market rate.
Smart people often do stupid things. Doing crack is stupid, but crack has taken down much smarter guys than me.
I doubt that's a distinction that will give MM much comfort, but it is a real one.
I don't know if I'd exactly call Pay2Play stupid - seems kind of harsh. Consider all the things we can get for free but pay for just for convenience or enjoyment's sake - TV, alcohol, food, etc.
Just to elaborate...
You can get broadcast TV for free, but how many people settle for that. Millions subscribe to cable or sat providers so they can get more. Thus in effect these subscribers (myself included) are paying for something they already have free access to (kind of like the gamer that owns the game, but pays to play it).
You can make your own alcohol, but its difficult and time consuming. The same for growing your own food. The ability to go to the grocery or liquor store offers a convenience that most people value greater than the money they spend to get it.
To some these might seem like poor analogies, but when you consider the pay2play gamer IMO a lot of them are paying not so much for the ability to play but for the entertainment they get in return. People spend billions globally on entertainment. Does it make them stupid? No.
To break this down into a "stupid" vs. "not stupid" argument is narrow-minded and doesn't consider the broader spectrum. However, we do it all the time. For example I consider it stupid for people to spend $75 - $100 dollars to see a sports game they can watch on TV for free. However, I'll think nothing about spending $6 on a movie from PPV that I can get from Redbox for $1. For me its the convenience of not having to drag my fat arse off the couch and drive to the store when I can just click a button on my buddy "Mr. Remote".
Modifié par Pstemarie, 01 septembre 2012 - 12:33 .
For the record, I'm not saying that everone who plays P2P MMOs is stupid. I don't think anyone has said that outright, although LM might have stepped over that line (sheep are kinda dumb). But I digress... I do think it's stupid to play P2P MMOs at the current market rate.
Smart people often do stupid things. Doing crack is stupid, but crack has taken down much smarter guys than me.
I doubt that's a distinction that will give MM much comfort, but it is a real one.
While I can't speak for MM, I can get on board with that general idea. Even if I don't agree with the statement "it's stupid to play P2P MMOs at the current market rate" (it doesn't hold for every person in every situation, but it may for some), criticizing a behavior is very different from criticizing a person (which treats that behavior as some kind of character flaw). I think it's a useful distinction to make, even if it doesn't make us all come to sudden agreement.
Pstemarie wrote...
I don't know if I'd exactly call Pay2Play stupid - seems kind of harsh. Consider all the things we can get for free but pay for just for convenience or enjoyment's sake - TV, alcohol, food, etc.
Just to elaborate...
You can get broadcast TV for free, but how many people settle for that. Millions subscribe to cable or sat providers so they can get more. Thus in effect these subscribers (myself included) are paying for something they already have free access to (kind of like the gamer that owns the game, but pays to play it).
You can make your own alcohol, but its difficult and time consuming. The same for growing your own food. The ability to go to the grocery or liquor store offers a convenience that most people value greater than the money they spend to get it.
To some these might seem like poor analogies, but when you consider the pay2play gamer IMO a lot of them are paying not so much for the ability to play but for the entertainment they get in return. People spend billions globally on entertainment. Does it make them stupid? No.
To break this down into a "stupid" vs. "not stupid" argument is narrow-minded and doesn't consider the broader spectrum. However, we do it all the time. For example I consider it stupid for people to spend $75 - $100 dollars to see a sports game they can watch on TV for free. However, I'll think nothing about spending $6 on a movie from PPV that I can get from Redbox for $1. For me its the convenience of not having to drag my fat arse off the couch and drive to the store when I can just click a button on my buddy "Mr. Remote".
QFT. I was going to make a similar analogy about buying Starbucks coffe versus making your own.
Don't forget that often taking time and effort to do something yourself increases the value rather than decreasing it. This is why so many of us love NWN. The chance to do something yourself instead of having it pre-packaged is one of the selling points.
Modifié par Squatting Monk, 01 septembre 2012 - 08:34 .
Don't forget that often taking time and effort to do something yourself increases the value rather than decreasing it. This is why so many of us love NWN. The chance to do something yourself instead of having it pre-packaged is one of the selling points.
Now this is absolutely true. I think someone else might have said something similar earlier on... Amongst a plethora of other points that also got overlooked due to a myopic focus on one thing...
I don't think the analogies being thrown around are quite appropriate though. To me P2P is more like, you went to the store and bought a cake. Then when you get home, every time you want to have a slice of that cake (a month of playing), you have to pay the baker again.
I don't think the analogies being thrown around are quite appropriate though. To me P2P is more like, you went to the store and bought a cake. Then when you get home, every time you want to have a slice of that cake (a month of playing), you have to pay the baker again.
I dunno, I think the coffee anology is pretty good. I could buy a coffee grinder, blender, beans, milk, sugar, and all that jazz in one lump sum, then make my own coffee each time I wanna drink. Or I could go to Starbucks and pay for a frappucino every time I want one. Seems rather analogous to one-shot payment versus monthly fees. After all, what's being paid for in either case is not just a product, but a service (unlike with the cake analogy).
Modifié par Squatting Monk, 02 septembre 2012 - 06:56 .
Don't forget that often taking time and effort to do something yourself increases the value rather than decreasing it. This is why so many of us love NWN. The chance to do something yourself instead of having it pre-packaged is one of the selling points.
This couldn't be more true - at least for me and I'm sure for many of the folks that land on the NWN side of this discussion. Over the last couple of days EQ has lost much of its appeal to me and I keep finding myself working on things for NWN. This is largely because I'm a creator more than I'm a player - all one has to do is look at my portfolio regarding NWN.
Been busy trying to figure out why some hak changes I was making weren't working. Then I realized I was including the updated files as text files instead of changing them back to 2das. Sigh. Long day.
Squatting Monk wrote...
Well, yeah, but that's going to be true regardless of the ruleset you use. Unless the game is insanely balanced, there's going to be a few builds that outshine the others.
WoW has a set environment with which which you can judge your build's effectiveness. NWN doesn't, really. While you can run the math to see if build A is more optimized for damage than build B, whether or not a build is viable is largely subjective, and often inseparable from the environment in which it is played.
For the record, WoW is one of those insanely balanced games for the most part, where in the vast majority of cases you're talking about being a few percent different. Which is why the game has so "few" specializations, because the focus is on making each viable. Very different from NWN in that degree, but whether it's worse or better is a matter of opinion (aka, do you care about variety regardless of effectiveness or solely about optimization?).
And for a given environment you can still optimize and figure out the best builds, especially within a subset. For example, you can figure out the best build for an arcane spellcaster, best build for a tank, etc. If things are balanced very loosely, something 20% worse might be "viable" but it's certainly not optimal.
Squatting Monk wrote...
I like the idea of being able to cast many different types of spells, but you're right. I haven't seen breadth of tactics in practice. I remember players on the old server I played on lamenting that they wanted to play a different style of caster but that spamming IGMS outshined everything.
This is where NWN's customization can make things better. You can change the balance by customizing the spells, or you can design your module so as to reward clever spell use (though that's easier said than done). I'd like to see more discussion on how to do this.
I'm working on one way in my exhibition module as per our discussion. I have the melee stuff nearly entirely working, need to set up the exhibition part and then I'll get to work on the spellcasting stuff (which should also be easier to implement since I have a framework from the melee stuff).
Squatting Monk wrote...
I think it goes back to what I said about NWN building for flavor. You want a character that feels fresh and original, not necessarily one that has unique capabilities. (I think this is more true in an RP setting than elsewhere. YMMV)
Fair enough.
Urk wrote...
The reason you find the F2P payment model less objectionable than the P2P is because: 1) You are very likely paying much less in the long run to keep your account. There is usually an initial investment of 20 bucks or so (to unlock inventory and bank slots, remove wealth caps, etc) and from time to time you need to throw another fin or two at the game (to remove level caps, unlock new areas, buy vanity items, etc) but in the long run your costs tend to be lower.
Depends entirely on the F2P game. Traditionally you've had to pay to increase experience gain to something reasonable or for important items and effectively get nickeled and dimed to death. Perhaps some of the newer F2P games are breaking away from the mold, but that's the stigma and reality for most F2P stuff. There's a reason it's called "Pay to Win."
Urk wrote...
3) You won't be charged to not play. You can choose to take a few weeks (or months, or years) off from playing without having to go through the hassle of cancelling your payment and without having to worry about your housing decaying. Finally, and maybe most importantly, you still have the luxury of just spontaniously firing up the game whenever you want without having to deal with restarting your billing (and without running the risk of rate increases).
Continuing from above, if you buy an experience voucher for a 900% XP bonus for a month, you're effectively locked in just like P2P. Sunk costs either way, of course, but same pressure. Likewise, if anything it's F2P games that do stuff like having your housing decay if you don't keep paying real life money to maintain it. Again, maybe some of the newer F2P stuff is different, but that's traditionally been the case.
Urk wrote...
For the record, I'm not saying that everone who plays P2P MMOs is stupid. I don't think anyone has said that outright, although LM might have stepped over that line (sheep are kinda dumb). But I digress... I do think it's stupid to play P2P MMOs at the current market rate.
Think of it this way for a moment.
WoW has a monopoly on quality high end raiding. I literally do not know of any other game, P2P or F2P, that offers anything close to the same experience and enjoyment as WoW in that regard.
Honestly I'd easily be willing to pay double the current monthly rate because I enjoy raiding that much. I love working with other people, going over strategies, and executing complex encounters perfectly to beat an insanely difficult boss fight in an epic experience.
In terms of video games, it's basically what I live for. And I get it for $0.50 a day. From that perspective, does it seem so stupid?
Pstemarie wrote...
You can get broadcast TV for free, but how many people settle for that. Millions subscribe to cable or sat providers so they can get more. Thus in effect these subscribers (myself included) are paying for something they already have free access to (kind of like the gamer that owns the game, but pays to play it).
Exactly. They think the additional quality and options is worth the money each month.
Lazarus Magni wrote...
I don't think the analogies being thrown around are quite appropriate though. To me P2P is more like, you went to the store and bought a cake. Then when you get home, every time you want to have a slice of that cake (a month of playing), you have to pay the baker again.
Your analogy would make more sense if the cake you bought stayed at the store and the baker had to maintain it for you.
Would be more accurate if you paid the baker each month to make cakes at a reasonable rate for you (monthly charge) and then paid a premium if you wanted a really special cake (expansions).
Pstemarie wrote...
This couldn't be more true - at least for me and I'm sure for many of the folks that land on the NWN side of this discussion. Over the last couple of days EQ has lost much of its appeal to me and I keep finding myself working on things for NWN. This is largely because I'm a creator more than I'm a player - all one has to do is look at my portfolio regarding NWN.
I wasn't aware there was a "NWN side" and then a "different side." I think everyone here enjoys NWN, whether it be creating (Squatting Monk and I both really enjoy creating stuff in NWN like you) or simply playing. Some of us just also enjoy playing WoW and other games as well and don't like being insulted for doing so.
Modifié par MagicalMaster, 03 septembre 2012 - 04:59 .
...like MM said P2P is sometimes refered to jokingly as pay to win...but seriously...I think a game that gives thoose with cash too much advances will kind of make it boring for the ones that pour less money into the game and as thoose are probably more likely to be the bulk of the players it would be foolish to mess too much with them if you get my point...hence why I think most P2P games try not to be too much "Pay to Win"...
This couldn't be more true - at least for me and I'm sure for many of the folks that land on the NWN side of this discussion. Over the last couple of days EQ has lost much of its appeal to me and I keep finding myself working on things for NWN. This is largely because I'm a creator more than I'm a player - all one has to do is look at my portfolio regarding NWN.
I wasn't aware there was a "NWN side" and then a "different side." I think everyone here enjoys NWN, whether it be creating (Squatting Monk and I both really enjoy creating stuff in NWN like you) or simply playing. Some of us just also enjoy playing WoW and other games as well and don't like being insulted for doing so.
I was referring to the "side" of being able to create your own content and have it come to life in the game (NWN) vs. playing with whatever you're given by the developers. However, the lack of this capability, that is unique to NWN and a few other games, by no means diminishes the quality of those games.
I was referring to the "side" of being able to create your own content and have it come to life in the game (NWN) vs. playing with whatever you're given by the developers. However, the lack of this capability, that is unique to NWN and a few other games, by no means diminishes the quality of those games.
Fair enough. That said, I think it's worth keeping in mind that the majority (if not the vast majority) of people who play NWN don't make create anything.
Also came across a quote here that I found interesting. It was talking about a MMO called "The Secret World" but I think it's quite relevant (talking about different possible reasons why the game isn't more of a success):
6: Subscriptions are for punks.
I remember saying I expected Star Wars to be the last subscription game. I was wrong. I tend to agree that this business model is getting outdated, but I’m not sure we have an adequate replacement for it yet, either. Guild Wars 2 may have sold a million copies, but I have no idea the ratio of that income against their investment; 60 million may only be a drop in the bucket, and now what? Loot that you’re required to pay cash to access, for one (or so I’ve heard): chests that can only be unlocked from extremely rare drop keys or from the cash shop (this may be somewhat inaccurate, to be fair, as I’m hearing it very 3rd party). Perhaps the Allods model, where leveling grinds to a hellish halt unless you buy xp bonus pots with real money? I’m not really happy with either; I prefer the more direct honesty of a subscription rather than the somewhat prestidigitous surprise costs of “free to play” models. Perhaps that’s just me.
Modifié par MagicalMaster, 04 septembre 2012 - 04:47 .
As I am no expert on WoW, I had a long chat with a buddy who is (has been playing since the start). I will post some of his text and thinking on questions that I asked Note that he also played NWN for a long time, as well. Some of you may know him online as Granny Weatherwax.
Granny says
the amount of grinded gear you need has increasedand everyone can grind itthe amount of skill it takes is constantly decreasingthe bosses get harder, and the remedy is, you need more and better gear, that's allit doesn't take brains any moreplus there are quite a lot of people who dislike pandas
WebShaman says
Are you saying that you have to have items in order to do the raids?
Granny says
you certainly have toit has always been like that
WebShaman says
Because someone else on the NWN boards says that is not true. That the opposite is true - one needs items in NWN to "compete".Not so much so in WoW...You know more than I do about WoW.How important are items to DPS maxing and Raiding?
Granny says
you aren't be able to kill deathwing in hard mode without having grinded items in normal mode
WebShaman says
Pandas...>.< sounds like kung-fu pandas...ack!
Granny says
you aren't able to do the normal mode raid, without having grinded items in hard mode dungeons
WebShaman says
Hard mode is the highest?
Granny says
pve leveling < normal mode dungeons< hard mode dungeons < normal mode raids < hard mode raidsthat's the ranking
WebShaman says
Ah, ok.And you have to have the items to max out DPS for the hard mode raids? Are you sure?
Granny says
it is as certain as the pope is a catholic
So, from what I have garnered, one *needs* items to be able to raid at the higher levels - check. Also, from further conversation, the new expansion is making everything (skill trees, etc) simplier, i.e. easier, which many WoW pros are screaming and crying about. As well as Pandas.
Which brings us to a favorite comparison of mine - I play NWN for free (one purchase, then I do what I want). I don't have to worry about some dev getting wild hairs up his ying yang and changing the rules on me to a point where I don't wish to play the game anymore.
It would cause me no end of grief, and I would be absolutely livid if I was paying to play a game, and the devs did what they are doing to WoW in the upcoming XP. All that time and money invested into something, and in one fell sweep, it all gets trashed.
Thus, I do not (and will not) support the pay to play model.
And needing items of a certain level just to play certain raids just...gah. It sticks in my throat.
I just cannot see how anyone would subject themselves to this.
Granny says he only keeps playing due to his teamates. He also says that the next XP will probably be the end of his Guild (Clan, whatever) as many are quitting due to it.
Glad I am not hooked into WoW.
Modifié par WebShaman, 11 septembre 2012 - 09:27 .
the amount of grinded gear you need has increasedand everyone can grind itthe amount of skill it takes is constantly decreasingthe bosses get harder, and the remedy is, you need more and better gear, that's allit doesn't take brains any moreplus there are quite a lot of people who dislike pandas
The amount of skill it takes is constantly *decreasing?* I'd be surprised if he's ever done *ANY* heroic mode, and I can guarantee he's never done Heroic Nefarian, Sinestra, Al'akir, Cho'gall, Ragnaros, Spine of Deathwing, or Madness of Deathwing.
If anything, the amount of skill required is constantly *increasing.* The boss fights used to be much simpler and it was more about having enough warm bodies with enough gear instead of actually being good.
Now, what *has* changed is that the ultimate hard stuff used to be the only game in town. If you couldn't do it, too bad. Now there's an easy, normal, and heroic mode. So yes, easy mode is easy. And gives worse rewards. But the hardest boss fights have *never* been tougher than they have been this expansion. And "tougher" does not mean "needs more gear."
Webshaman says...
Because someone else on the NWN boards says that is not true. That the opposite is true - one needs items in NWN to "compete".Not so much so in WoW...You know more than I do about WoW.How important are items to DPS maxing and Raiding?
Granny says
you aren't be able to kill deathwing in hard mode without having grinded items in normal mode
That's simply not true. We cleared all of normal mode week one in Dragon Soul (the raid where Deathwing is). Over the next twoish months, we steadily beat each boss on heroic mode one by one. Once we got to Deathwing, we were able to kill him. We were *never* held back by gear. We *never* had to grind items in normal mode for months to do hard mode or something (now, we got better items from hard mode, sure).
Furthermore, only something like 2% of the playerbase even *does* heroic modes. And for normal modes, your gear can be pretty terrible if you're good. They're not tuned strictly.
That's not to say items are meaningless. They certainly help. But if you have the gear needed to do Dragon Soul, then you can do, say, 30k DPS. If you ground normal mode DS and had every item from there, you might be able to do like 40k DPS. So from no normal mode gear to grinding for six months or something gives you a 33% increase. That's the equivalent to 2-3 attack bonus in NWN.
In other words, if you're not quite as skilled and are 5% damage short, another raid or two might get you a few items and allow you to win. But if you're very good, it is incredibly rare that gear is ever actually the factor holding you back. Maybe for the top like 10 guilds in the world because they raid seven days a week. But even for them, it's the difference between the group dying at 5-10% on the boss versus winning.
WebShaman says
Pandas...>.< sounds like kung-fu pandas...ack!
Pandaren. And they've been in WoW since like 2003. They were almost the Alliance race for The Burning Crusade.
The Pandaren are a peaceful culture trying to live in harmony. Because if they get angry, jealous, scared, or a similar emotion then giant shadow demons spawn, feeding on that negative emotion, and try to kill everyone.
Oh, and there's an insect race called the Mantid that try to kill everything every 1,000 years. And now they're invading ahead of schedule.
Oh, and there's an Ogre-like race called the Mogu that used to rule the continent and enslaved the Panderan. They're launching an offensive to take over the continent again as well.
And on top of that the Alliance and Horde arrive, bringing plenty of hatred and conflict.
Take a look at this:
That giant shadow thing? It's called the Sha of Doubt and it's about to cause a ton of havoc since it was released from its prison. And it's just one of at least four major Shas that are known.
Granny says
you aren't able to do the normal mode raid, without having grinded items in hard mode dungeons
You can if you're good enough. If not, you can get better items to make you 20-30% better. But your power doesn't double or something.
Granny says
pve leveling < normal mode dungeons< hard mode dungeons < normal mode raids < hard mode raidsthat's the ranking
What's not mentioned in the timeline here (and note that this only applies at the start of an expansion or for a new character).
The first four steps there? We'll be done with those within two weeks. And that's only because we raid at the end of the week. Other groups will be done with steps one through four within like eight days. And again, that's only because you *cannot* do normal raids the first week. They're not even open.
What's also not mentioned is 75%+ of the total time is spent all in that last step: heroic raids.
And for future raids within the expansion, nothing will happen beyond one week of normal raids and then the rest of the time is heroic raiding.
Webshaman says...
So, from what I have garnered, one *needs* items to be able to raid at the higher levels - check.
I never said otherwise. I just said it wasn't as big of an impact as in NWN. And that you never simply died or couldn't do a particular boss since you didn't have a specific item. And each item is a 2%ish impact in most cases (maybe like 5% for a weapon).
Would you expect to take a level 40 fighter with nothing but a standard full plate and longsword and be able to fight tough enemies? Of course not. You need at least some decent gear - all RPGs follow that rule.
Webshaman says...
Also, from further conversation, the new expansion is making everything (skill trees, etc) simplier, i.e. easier, which many WoW pros are screaming and crying about. As well as Pandas.
No, just no. "Pandas" I mentioned above. And perish the thought of pandas in a world with cow-men, goblins, werewolves, elves, fish-men, dwarfs, orcs, rodent-men, etc.
Talent trees are actually being made harder. The difference is that instead of filling in a spreadsheet based upon optimization someone else did and you just Googled and where you only actually make one or two choices...now you make *six* choices instead of one or two. Personally, my "two choices" meant I took 4% less spell damage.
Such choice! It's overwhelming! I actually have to *think* about the new stuff and figure out the best way to use them and what choices will be better in which situations.
Also, what is "etc" in this case?
The actual WoW-Pros are not screaming about it at all. By Pros I'm talking about, say, the top 1000 World guilds (out of 60,000+). There are some people who may not like the changes, but the majority are at least fine with or even enthusiastic about it. And from what I've seen, the people who don't like the changes simply don't understand the reasoning behind them and are suffering from a knee-jerk reaction.
Webshaman says...
Which brings us to a favorite comparison of mine - I play NWN for free (one purchase, then I do what I want). I don't have to worry about some dev getting wild hairs up his ying yang and changing the rules on me to a point where I don't wish to play the game anymore.
If you play on a specific PW, sure you do! And if the rules have been changed much (particularly some custom feats or something) then that character isn't even playable elsewhere. Even if the rules have changed, you can't take the character to another PW.
Now, if you're talking about single-player, then sure. But on the flip side, many authors do change the rules and you simply don't play their campaigns.
Webshaman says...
It would cause me no end of grief, and I would be absolutely livid if I was paying to play a game, and the devs did what they are doing to WoW in the upcoming XP. All that time and money invested into something, and in one fell sweep, it all gets trashed.
I don't always agree with Blizzard. And even if I do, many times I'm not happy about it but I understand their reasoning.
But for Mists? I'd say I'm very happy with at least 90% of the changes. Some stuff I don't like but it's fairly minor stuff or stuff I recognize as necessary even if I don't personally like it (like not having all raiding be at the ultimate hard mode).
Webshaman says...
And needing items of a certain level just to play certain raids just...gah. It sticks in my throat.
I don't think you understand the situation. You're basically saying "it sticks in my throat that my fighter with a +1 longsword can't get past the damage reduction of this Dracolich." Though in WoW it would be more like "it sticks in my throat that my fighter is expected to do 30% more damage than he can do for this really hard boss fight when I just hit max level."
If you did each dungeon once or twice to see and explore them, you'd basically be set for normal raids. You do not have to spend months doing them or something.
Modifié par MagicalMaster, 12 septembre 2012 - 07:49 .
I have one person telling me things that I know and trust.
And I have you saying the opposite.
I think you can see how that is going.
BTW -
I never said otherwise. I just said it wasn't as big of an impact as in NWN. And that you never simply died or couldn't do a particular boss since you didn't have a specific item.
Now, Granny says you get a message saying "you don't have items X (whatever)" that prevents doing the Raid Y if you do not have the necessary items. You saying that is not true?
Be aware that I can post pics here...
Where in the OCs does one need "certain items" to complete it (NWN)?
I will put it this way - I know the NWN OCs very, very well. I know that I can complete them without "necessary items" - and I never needed "specific items" to defeat any Boss.
This comparison is false.
If you play on a specific PW, sure you do! And if the rules have been changed much (particularly some custom feats or something) then that character isn't even playable elsewhere. Even if the rules have changed, you can't take the character to another PW.
Now, if you're talking about single-player, then sure. But on the flip side, many authors do change the rules and you simply don't play their campaigns.
Oh, that is just not the case. If I don't like a specific PW, blah blah, I can make my own. Did it with Thain, for example - d/l and changed it to suit my tastes. And others. And if I don't like how an author did a certain adventure, then I change it.
I can do this in NWN. Can you do this in WoW?
You seem very "fanbois-ish" towards WoW in your text walls. Which is ok, I guess. I have nothing against you liking or playing the game. But what I am hearing from others, is very different from what you are posting.
So I will bow out here, as there is nothing more here for me to discuss. Why should I trust your text walls more than the words from those I have known for years?
Y'know guys... you've gone well beyond NWN vs. WoW and are now just debating the mertis of WoW which is waaaaaay off-topic for this forum. Please take it elsewhere and quit trolling each other here.
Modifié par PlasmaJohn, 13 septembre 2012 - 05:44 .
Well… this thread has evolved into having many topics, but I think we have fleshed out the differences between WOW and NWN1 ad nauseam.
I still however don’t think some of the main points of this thread have been adequately discussed, specifically:
1) What is the future of on line multiplayer games?
2) And what I am more interested in is, can we think of ideas that would give a game developer incentive to produce a modern day equivalent to NWN 1?
As the article (http://games.yahoo.c...-223042438.html) in the OP pointed out, MMO games are changing. I encourage everyone to re-read this. Bioware, EA, and Blizzard are all discussed, and it has some very telling insights I think.
The article basically contends that F2P model is making a come back and P2P is on the decline. But my question is, how can the F2P model be sustainable for the developer, to provide them with enough incentive to produce a modern day equivalent of NWN 1? What ideas do you all have about that?
I put forth the idea of the developer offering reasonably priced, quality hosting, so that even ten years later, long after profits from sales have dropped off, they are still bringing in money from the title, providing them with incentive for continuing to support it, and equally important incentive in the first place for producing such a game. By such a game I mean one that can hold it’s customers interest for over a decade as NWN 1 has, which I chalk up primarily due to it’s modability (ability to customize.)
It’s basically art, which can be shared in an online, communal format. The game itself is the clay (or the paint, or whatever), and CC contributors are the artists, and PWs (and single player mods) are the art galleries. It’s a 21st century form of art, unlike any art before, where by the viewers of such art are active participants (players), and the original art can be the work of one individual, or 100’s.
So ok my idea might not work, or provide enough incentive. Especially if looked at in the short term, or compared to WOW profit model. But as some of the data we have seen (http://users.telenet...arts/Subs-1.png ), many others have tried to repeat the WOW model, and none have come close. So this isn’t really a fair comparison, or a reasonable bar to set.
I think Plasma John put forth the idea of licensing? Although the legalities of that might get complicated?
Ultimately it may not be any one thing that gives a developer the incentive to do this. It may be a combination of these things, or a desire to go down in history as the originator of a 21st century art form. Does anyone else have any ideas or thoughts on this?
Modifié par Lazarus Magni, 14 septembre 2012 - 07:18 .
You seem very "fanbois-ish" towards WoW in your text walls. Which is ok, I guess. I have nothing against you liking or playing the game. But what I am hearing from others, is very different from what you are posting.
So I will bow out here, as there is nothing more here for me to discuss. Why should I trust your text walls more than the words from those I have known for years?
If I seem "fanboi-ish" it's because I hate misinformation. There are many reasons not to play WoW, but I hate to see it falsely accused of something. And I've been negative about WoW quite a few times on the WoW forums. For example, I posted this less than an hour ago:
"I'm not enough of an optimist to trust Blizzard to never mess up like they did in t13 again. Or trust that we can convince them that it's a bad idea so they can change it if it looks like they're doing it again. Thus, I'm pushing for option 2 because that way if the worst comes to pass, we can do something about it. What I'm really trying to avoid is option 3."
I'm speaking about an issue that affects like 1% of the playerbase, by the way, if you're curious, which was solely an issue for the top maybe 1,000-2,000 guilds in the world (out of over 60,000 raiding guilds and far more non-raiding guilds).
But if you like playing on a PW or a campaign and someone started saying things about it that simply weren't true, wouldn't you defend it?
WebShaman wrote...
Well, let me see here.
I have one person telling me things that I know and trust.
And I have you saying the opposite.
I think you can see how that is going.
Which is why I asked if he had killed Heroic Nefarian, Sinestra, Cho'gall, Al'akir, Ragnaros, Spine of Deathwing, or Madness of Deathwing.
I doubt he has. In other words, he's talking about things in which he has little to no experience. Which doesn't make him a bad person or something but it means he doesn't really know what he's talking about. Do you think I'm lying about the facts I mentioned?
WebShaman wrote...
Now, Granny says you get a message saying "you don't have items X (whatever)" that prevents doing the Raid Y if you do not have the necessary items. You saying that is not true?
Be aware that I can post pics here...
I'm quite aware you can post pics here and I'd welcome you to do so if it'll help clear this up.
So, there are two parts to your question.
First of all, for Raids, there are NO restrictions. Zero. None. Besides being maximum level. If you made a WoW character and leveled up to 85, I could immediately take you to the hardest raid in the game and let you see it. Now, you wouldn't be able to pull your weight for multiple reasons, but there would be nothing from stopping you from entering the zone or fighting with us.
There *are* restrictions of sorts for AUTOMATED grouping. In WoW, there's an LFG (Looking for Group, assembles 5 man dungeon groups) and LFR (Looking for Raid, assembles 25 man raid groups). Note that LFR is intentionally designed to be easy and lack basically any sort of group responsibility because you're throwing 25 people sort of randomly together.
Because of the fact you're throwing together 5 or 25 complete strangers automatically together, the game does check to see if you pass a minimum AVERAGE gear threshold.
To put it in NWN terms, let's say you're playing a fighter. You hit level 40 with +3 armor, +2 amulet, +3 ring, +2 shield, and +2 boots. That's a total of 12 AC from items. Right away, you can do several dungeons that all drop +4 gear.
However, there's a tougher dungeon that's designed for a fighter with 16 AC from items. Before the system is willing to throw you into a random group for the harder dungeon, you have to get your AC up to +16. As you can tell, the total AC you can get from the easier dungeons is +20. You don't need to do them for every last piece or something, but you do need at least an item or two so you don't get slaughtered in the harder zone.
Which means, for example, you could do a dungeon or two and pick up a +4 amulet and +4 shield. Suddenly, you're able to be thrown into the automatic grouping system for the harder dungeon if you choose. Or, you could get your armor, ring, and boots to +4 each and have 16. Or your boots and shield. The system doesn't care which specific items you have, it just wants to know your overall AC is high enough to not get slaughtered.
So yeah, if you hit max level with a mundane full plate and longsword, the system will "Whoa there, no way I can send you into a group of strangers with that, you need at least SOME gear." Because if everyone in your group had the same equipment, you'd utterly fail. Just like in NWN where five fighters in mundane plate armor and longswords at max level would be pretty terrible. It wouldn't be fair to the rest of the group if you joined.
Now, that said, if you have four friends you are free to have them take you to the harder dungeon and run you through despite your 12 AC. You just cannot use the automatic grouping system. And said automatic grouping system only exists for easy content and not for normal or heroic raids.
If any of that is unclear, please let me know. It boils down to that the game won't randomly throw you into a group of strangers unless you pass a basic check to make sure you won't get slaughtered in an AUTOMATIC GROUPING and OPTIONAL system. Which is also easier content. If you want to do normal or heroic raids, the game will *never* tell you "You cannot enter this zone because you don't have certain items" or something.
WebShaman wrote...
Where in the OCs does one need "certain items" to complete it (NWN)?
I was referencing Higher Ground in that example. And I'm speaking from personal experience about constantly dying solely because I didn't have certain items on that world (mainly damage immunity/resistance items in that case). The OC is so easy it doesn't matter anyway, I meant in terms of a difficult campaign or PW.
WebShaman wrote...
Oh, that is just not the case. If I don't like a specific PW, blah blah, I can make my own. Did it with Thain, for example - d/l and changed it to suit my tastes. And others. And if I don't like how an author did a certain adventure, then I change it.
How many PWs can you download besides Thain? Honest question, I'm curious. And your willingness to edit PWs and campaigns in the toolset is beyond most players Which I think you know.
Modifié par MagicalMaster, 13 septembre 2012 - 10:33 .
Well… this thread has evolved into having many topics, but I think we have fleshed out the differences between WOW and NWN1 ad nauseam.
I still however don’t think some of the main points of this thread have been adequately discussed, specifically:
1) What is the future of on line multiplayer games? 2) And what I am more interested in is, can we think of ideas that would give a game developer incentive to produce a modern day equivalent to NWN 1?
As the article (http://games.yahoo.c...-223042438.html) in the OP pointed out, MMO games are changing. I encourage everyone to re-read this. Bioware, EA, and Blizzard are all discussed, and it has some very telling insights I think.
The article basically contends that F2P model is making a come back and P2P is on the decline. But my question is, how can the F2P model be sustainable for the developer, to provide them with enough incentive to produce a modern day equivalent of NWN 1? What ideas do you all have about that?
I put forth the idea of the developer offering reasonably priced, quality hosting, so that even ten years later, long after profits from sales have dropped off, they are still bringing in money from the title, providing them with incentive for continuing to support it, and equally important incentive in the first place for producing such a game. By such a game I mean one that can hold it’s customers interest for over a decade as NWN 1 has, which I chalk up primarily due to it’s modability (ability to customize.)
It’s basically art, which can be shared in an online, communal format. The game itself is the clay (or the paint, or whatever), and CC contributors are the artists, and PWs (and single player mods) are the art galleries. It’s a 21st century form of art, unlike any art before, where by the viewers of such art are active participants (players), and the original art can be the work of one individual, or 100’s.
So ok my idea might not work, or provide enough incentive. Especially if looked at in the short term, or compared to WOW profit model. But as some of the data we have seen (http://users.telenet...arts/Subs-1.png ), many others have tried to repeat the WOW model, and none have come close. So this isn’t really a fair comparison, or a reasonable bar to set.
I think Plasma John put forth the idea of licensing? Although the legalities of that might get complicated?
Ultimately it may not be any one thing that gives a developer the incentive to do this. It may be a combination of these things, or a desire to go down in history as the originator of a 21st century art form. Does anyone else have any ideas or thoughts on this?
Retour en haut
Which I think you know.
