HOMEGAME GUIDEMEDIAFORUMBuy Now!CRATE

Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.
This topic is closed.
X
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I'm just really not able to understand. So please, Scryer, just answer me the following question:

    If having to level up is so much of a punishment for you, why do you want to level up your first character?

    I mean, going by your arguments, wouldn't it be better to remove character levels completely, and let players create new characters at max level already?

    What argument against leveling up your second character is not an argument against leveling up your first one too?

    What argument for leveling up your first character is not true for your second character too?

    How can leveling up be simultaneously good and bad for two different characters?

    Isn't it either good for all characters, or bad for all characters? I mean, how does the character itself make a difference there?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by hooby View Post
      I'm just really not able to understand. So please, Scryer, just answer me the following question:
      I will do the best I can to answer your questions. Maybe you will answer a few of mine?

      Originally posted by hooby View Post
      If having to level up is so much of a punishment for you, why do you want to level up your first character?
      Leveling up is not a punishment, it should be something enjoyed at least one time through, and if the player so decides it will be enjoyed more then one time through. Each new character however will bring about a similar experience, not based on the actual masteries, but based on the fact that each time through will have the same story and events. this is the case of diminishing returns. Also, this similar experience is not generally enjoyed by those who wish to play a role that isn't broken or isn't enjoyable based on the mechanics of the originally chosen masteries.

      Originally posted by hooby View Post
      I mean, going by your arguments, wouldn't it be better to remove character levels completely, and let players create new characters at max level already?
      No, my argument simply states that the player should be given option at max level to correct their mastery choices to be more suitable to their play-style. The act of leveling up has already been facilitated and not granted to the player. (I.E. once you've leveled up you realize the end mastery choices do not work for your play-style.) Going through the story at least once is always important.

      Originally posted by hooby View Post
      What argument against leveling up your second character is not an argument against leveling up your first one too?
      Leveling up a second character would be helpful and useful for players that don't want to take on the arduous task of respecing their mastery, or for players that simply want two or more classes with different play-styles simply because they enjoy them. Notice that no-where do I say mastery respecs should be easy or whimsical, yet your question seems to imply that they will be.

      Originally posted by hooby View Post
      What argument for leveling up your first character is not true for your second character too?
      Leveling up your "first" character is based solely on the faith that the two masteries chosen will be what is expected for a specific play-style. If the masteries are completely not what one expected them to be then the player would be forced to make a second character based on the fact that the play-style did not match up with the player's desired effect.

      So what makes the difference is based solely on the fact that the player will not have had the proper information available to them to decide if the two masteries will be their preferred play-style for them for the first character. For the second character the player will now know two thirds of the classes to choose and combine.

      Also, the second character could facilitate other play-styles if the player wishes to have multiple characters with multiple play-styles. Having the option to respec masteries on their first character does not give the player a second character in which to enjoy different play-styles. The player still only has one character, and that is not the same as having two characters with different play-styles.

      Originally posted by hooby View Post
      How can leveling up be simultaneously good and bad for two different characters?
      Leveling is good for both characters. It gives the player the ability to have two different characters with two different play-styles. Mastery respecs are for single characters and thus only provide a single play-style 100% of the time.

      Originally posted by hooby View Post
      Isn't it either good for all characters, or bad for all characters? I mean, how does the character itself make a difference there?
      Leveling is good for all characters, it provides the benefit of play experience. However, max level play is different from low level play. The character is important to the player because of the experience that goes into him, and the leveling process.

      If you're trying to say that mastery respecs will cause players to never level another character, I wold ask you, why should the player level another character? My answer is this - to have other characters with different play-styles. Leveling should be fun in any case.

      The answer I've been getting, over and over again is this - players should have to level up again if they want to try a new mastery, there should be no options given to the player to change this, and the player should be forced through the story again.

      My answer is this - the player should be given options even if they are hard to obtain, if the player wants to level a new character it should be because they want to do it, not because they are being forced to do it, play-styles can vary at high level and thus an option to respec ones masteries would facilitate a better game for those that want the option. The player should not be forced through the game again especially just to create a new mastery with the proper play-style. Those that do not want the option will not have a problem with this, because they can choose not to use the option, thus is the nature of options.
      Last edited by Scryer; 10-30-2010, 07:53 AM.
      _______
      Legendary Fan & KickStart Supporter

      Comment


      • #18
        First of all, your first paragraph disagrees with your second.
        The two paragraphs do not so much disagree as to make a point regarding boundaries. If Crate were to say no to mastery respec, that is the design decision that has been made. It is one such boundary that has been established, for whatever reason Crate (or any other developer) were to feel as being important with regards to either gameplay or character development.

        However, if a third party unendorsed mod to the game file were brought out by a member of the public, and a player were to use this to respec their character, that is fine also It is their character after all. It breaks the design boundaries which the developer sought to create, but that may simply be due to a different visage of what matters to the player. The community will have differing opinions, as you can see here, but ultimately, it won't be true to the game design. And people exist who like to live within the rules set forth by the game, even if they may not agree wit them.

        For instance, the great strength of the Titan Quest fan patch was that it only went ahead and fixed the bugs. At no point did the team who did it try and bring in their own ideas of how the game should play, or balance out, and change the nature of the game to suit their vision.

        You're saying that it's not okay to let players respec masteries, even though they may make bad decisions? That implies 2 things, that either Crate will make the masteries not fit well together, or the player will end up making bad choices and not be allowed to correct them unless he starts a new character.
        What you've done is now put words in my mouth. In no way did I say, or imply that masteries won't fit well together, or the player will make bad choices. In fact, I challenge you to go through my post yet again and point out where I said that. I said the player should be prepared to tackle the consequences of their decision, both the good and the bad.

        It might be that a character combination isn't suited to one area, and so will serve as a challenge, while in another area, the player will be at an advantage. Or they find some equipment which would be much better when used with a different class than what they have, but have to ignore it. And sure, if they keep on playing, remain persistent with the character, they may in fact find a new item which is in fact better suited to the decision made regarding skill choice. I believe the gameplay is lost if the player can continue to adapt to meet every single threat with ease. That isn't how a player improves their skill with a game, a player improves by being challenged, looking at the tools they have on hand and using them.

        I loved Oblivion, I think it's a wonderful game, it let you master everything if you wanted to. But that's absolutely not what I'm suggesting. Masteries can only be combined by 2, so there is no way to master everything, indeed it shouldn't even be possible. However, the option to change your mastery should be possible, because it would be an option to the dedicated player.
        I know within the 2 class system there is no way to master everything. However, at no point will there be a true Achilles Heel on the player if they are able to change themselves at will to meet whatever new threat that raises the bar with difficulty. Forgot to add. By at will, I should say that making a simple gold cost is realistically at will, considering gold is easy to come by late game. Which, if following the idea you also mention of only allowing a respec at max level, will not be a problem.
        Last edited by Josho; 10-30-2010, 07:55 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Josho View Post
          I know within the 2 class system there is no way to master everything. However, at no point will there be a true Achilles Heel on the player if they are able to change themselves at will to meet whatever new threat that raises the bar with difficulty. Forgot to add. By at will, I should say that making a simple gold cost is realistically at will, considering gold is easy to come by late game. Which, if following the idea you also mention of only allowing a respec at max level, will not be a problem.
          Sorry if you think I was putting words in your mouth, I was just trying to make a point, however, I will concede to that and say that I'm sorry.

          Where will there not be a true Achilles' Heel? If a player is only ever allowed to respec into two masteries, or one even, what exactly will make them invincible in a properly balanced game?

          Also, I never say that respecs should be easy, I think gold cost is not the only way to make such a thing difficult for the player to attain. However, if gold were balanced right I don't see how a high gold cost would be a problem.

          Here's some ways to limit mastery respecs and make them hard to do.

          - Extreme gold cost.

          - Extreme gold cost + rare item + a difficult quest.

          - Extreme gold cost + rare item + rare item + rare item + combined rare items

          - Extreme gold cost, only allowable at level 200.

          Note: Rare items are not equipment, they are random drops that must be farmed.

          This is what I mean by the dedicated player, it's still an option, how does that hurt the game? I think it enhances the game.
          Last edited by Scryer; 10-30-2010, 08:10 AM.
          _______
          Legendary Fan & KickStart Supporter

          Comment


          • #20
            One final thing I forgot to mention, if Crate say yes to mastery respec, there will be no nerd rage from me. Like I said, it is up to them to set the design vision of the game, and how they want it to go.

            To be honest, I'm all for experimenting with mechanics, but personally, I just don't see mastery respec as being one way to push the game forward.

            Comment


            • #21
              - Extreme gold cost + rare item + a difficult quest.
              That would probably be the way I would agree on with a mastery respec. Better yet, not allow the player to have any access to any of their skills when they go through this area to finish the quest, just relying on their equipment alone.

              Edit: Also Scryer, apology accepted. Don't take too much with my comments though, it is the debater coming out in me.
              Last edited by Josho; 10-30-2010, 08:14 AM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Josho View Post
                One final thing I forgot to mention, if Crate say yes to mastery respec, there will be no nerd rage from me. Like I said, it is up to them to set the design vision of the game, and how they want it to go.

                To be honest, I'm all for experimenting with mechanics, but personally, I just don't see mastery respec as being one way to push the game forward.
                Mastery respecs don't "push forward" they enhance the players' experience. It gives them another goal at the end of the game. It's an absolutely awesome idea that Grim Dawn could take advantage of. I think it's an awesome idea at least and that's why I'm trying to be logical in my arguments.

                I'm not arguing that this must be included into Grim Dawn, I'm just saying that giving the player the option to respec their mastery would enhance the game in a unique way that other games just would not be able to accomplish. Whether or not Crate thinks it's a good idea or not is irrelevant to me, because the point of these forums is to give them both sides of the argument, they can do the weighing and choose which one is actually better for their design.

                I think some good arguments have been brought up here, but there's always need for further investigation, and that's what these forums are for.

                Originally posted by Josho View Post
                That would probably be the way I would agree on with a mastery respec. Better yet, not allow the player to have any access to any of their skills when they go through this area to finish the quest, just relying on their equipment alone.

                Edit: Also Scryer, apology accepted. Don't take too much with my comments though, it is the debater coming out in me.
                Yeah, I think I irritate a lot of people on these forums because I simply don't give up sometimes, and I've been trying not to be provocative. So if I come off that way I'm really sorry, I'm just out to make a strong point. I don't like crossing the line though, so thank you for letting me know.

                Anyways, at least thank you for the straight forward conversation.

                Also, I appreciate anyone who's been willing to debate this matter with me, at least it's an interesting topic.
                Last edited by Scryer; 10-30-2010, 08:25 AM.
                _______
                Legendary Fan & KickStart Supporter

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Scryer View Post
                  I disagree, a lot of what goes into games are based on facts and psychological facts. For example, a game generally not fun when you give the player all the power from the start.
                  I agree with the last sentence, you do not give the player the choice to start at level 1, level 100 or anywhere in between. You do not give the player access to all gear right away either. These also are decisions however, not facts.
                  The vast majority prefers these limits, so we take them as a fact of game design.

                  That is not really where I was going though, what mastery you prefer, what type of game you prefer is all based on opinion, not fact. This is what I meant when I said there are very few facts and a lot of opinion when discussing games.

                  Not at all my point. The option to respec masteries comes from play-style testing. With 5 masteries to try out, how will a player try any of the combinations and come to enjoy them the way they are expected to? Neither of us know that, so what will taking the option out of the game do? It will arbitrarily limit the player.
                  Having the option to respec once or twice instead of an unlimited time arbitrarily limits the player too.

                  What I will be doing is the following, start a char of the 3 masteries I like best (based on nothing whatsoever but my unproven understanding of them) and then pick their secondary mastery from the ones I had not chosen as primary.
                  This way I have experienced them all and then know if I should have used a different combination / if I want to try a different combination in addition to the ones I already tried.

                  If leveling up a second char is fun, I do not mind that at all

                  Just because I'm the only one defending the idea does not make it a flawed idea.
                  Actually, yes it does. What you call facts above are really predominant opinions, based on that, it is a fact that allowing the respeccing of masteries is bad.

                  It's an option. How does that hurt a player specifically?
                  this goes back to what I have been saying all along. It hurts by taking away uniqueness, and if the majority opinion is that it is a bad idea, then it is bordering on being a fact that it is a bad idea.

                  It's not "throw all choices in" it's "give the player a chance to see what he likes without being forced to re-level." If you don't care about the option to respec masteries, why ruin the experience for those that want the option?
                  Why not allow me to start a build at any level with access to all gear if I want that option ? Because it ruins the experience for pretty much everyone else, that is why.

                  I agree that if Crate makes exceptional skills then this may never be a problem. However, I don't see how not having mastery respecs are a necessary boundary.
                  I get that, everyone else considers it a necessary boundary however.

                  First of all, your first paragraph disagrees with your second. You're saying that it's not okay to let players respec masteries, even though they may make bad decisions? That (seems to) imply 2 that te player will end up making bad choices and not be allowed to correct them unless he starts a new character.
                  yes, that is not a contradiction however. It is choosing between two alternatives and picking the one I prefer. Either I allow respeccing of masteries, or I have to start over to have a char with a different mastery. I prefer the game to force me to start over instead of giving me the choice to respec the mastery.
                  Last edited by mamba; 10-30-2010, 01:22 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    IMO - creating your build from beginning to end should be work. Not busy work, but fun work. If you have to respec to achieve a useful build, well fine, you suck, this is a hardcore game. Being able to play through the game, and realizing, "You know, this build isn't as efficient as I'd like it to be", then browsing the forums for a build that is overpowered and coming back to the game, switching masteries to fit that build and replicating it... that kinda ruins the experience for everyone.

                    It's like, yeah, I made this awesome build... took me hours of farming and leveling to reach the point where it was this great... and then someone else can just swap a few points around and have the same exact build, even if they didn't start off using the same class.

                    For example, in TQ say you start off as nature and max wolves asap. Reach level 20 and discover the wolves are far less efficient than they were before. Now what? Easy, respec into Spirit and ternion-pwnface. Now, if you started with Spirit on the other hand, you wouldn't have had it so easy compared to the nature class. Spirit starts slow and gains momentum as you level, while nature doesn't really pick up, it's always a mediocre class unless you know how to use the skills properly, but the first level is immensely powerful due to the strength of the wolves.

                    Basically - this idea would unbalance the game and make it less fun for the hardcore fans. It also removes any time sinks by allowing the player to change his mastery and play with every mastery with a single character. Not a fun thing at all, if you want to do that, wait til defiler comes out. I don't care if it has to do with opinion, or having a crap build, remember, this is a game geared towards the HARDCORE.

                    HARDCORE players do not have trouble in ARPGs with ANY class.

                    ...I had something else to add but I forgot.


                    With that said - I'll be leaving this thread forever cause debating with Scryer is a never ending process. :P

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by ASYLUM101 View Post
                      ... that kinda ruins the experience for everyone.
                      You know, I don't really care which way they go with the mastery respec since I see both sides and well I will play it either way. However, I don't see how it "ruins" the game for anyone. If someone doesn't want to use a certain aspect of the game then why is it they want to take it away from everyone?

                      Who is to say what is fun for someone else? We have all played these types of games enough by now and know what is fun for ourselves.

                      If any of that makes any sense...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Mastery respeccing is already in the game. We wanted to impose a significant cost though, as many of you advocating this idea have suggested. We felt that a cost in gold wasn't enough though since, at very high levels, it is almost inevitable in a closed economy like this that players will wind up with a surplus of gold. So we've given mastery respeccing a cost in experience. The experience cost of respeccing will be equivalent to the character's level at the time of respeccing. So, appropriately, the cost will be more significant for higher level characters.

                        We didn't want to divert our resources from more important features to create a new UI for this system, so it will work using the character creation UI and the player's own imagination. The player simply creates a new character and imagines that it is their old character born again with the option to choose any new mastery combination they desire but with the cost of having to level up again.

                        I'd explain the reasoning but I think it can already be pieced together out of points various people have already made in this thread.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          lol

                          See, that makes everyone happy. The option to respec is there, and the cost is high enough to make it matter!

                          Great response, by the way.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Well there you have it, certainly ends the debate
                            "I've always felt that a person's intelligence is directly reflected by the number of conflicting points of view he can entertain simultaneously on the same topic."

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Desnok View Post
                              lol

                              See, that makes everyone happy. The option to respec is there, and the cost is high enough to make it matter!

                              Great response, by the way.
                              I'm pretty sure, Scryer won't be happy with that.

                              Now that he admitted that leveling up a new character is fun, he's talking about not being forced to go through the story again...

                              But in that case I'd say, the story needs to be improved. But anyways - you can just click all dialoge away if you don't like it. I never again listened to the story after my first TQ play-through. It really wasn't that good imho.

                              And don't forget, he want's the respec to have a cost so extreme that:
                              Originally posted by Scryer View Post
                              Leveling up a second character would be helpful and useful for players that don't want to take on the arduous task of respecing their mastery
                              So maybe something along the lines of having to farm gold (without story) for the same amount of time it would take to level up a new char - would be more to his liking.

                              Any modders around here? I'm pretty sure someone could do that for him. ^^
                              Last edited by hooby; 10-30-2010, 06:11 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I dont think you should be forced to respecify to overcome an obstacle in the game -- especially if you were doing fine. Of course, one can expect that a character should take some defensive abilities.

                                But this is more in regards to skills and attribute points.

                                I dont like respecifing skills or attributes (it breaks up the roleplaying) but the information on skills is limited. Further you dont know how well skills will level up -- especially if you havent played the game alot yet and/or the rest of the tree isnt available.

                                You could choose some skills that are mild support skills but the description doesnt convey that or maybe it is something else like weapons are effective now but later they wont be and you will need something else that will provide more of an attack. Or maybe there is a jump in attribute requrements for armor or weapons and then you wish you didnt spread some out to other areas.

                                The user has a concept of the desired character and plans but a respecification indicates a failure in being able to do that.

                                Respecifing a character completely is a convienience for some types of players or situations. The question becomes the cost to implement that or if it is really wise to allow the user to not experience the progression of the character. Some users may not be willing or have the time to play through areas again.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X