Compromise for DPS Meters: Tooltip Numbers

So as we know Ashes of Creation will most likely not have any DPS meters. I am personally all for this as I think it becomes a form of Gatekeeping and actually forces a Meta rather than open discussions on how to improve. When it is easy to tell the exact best way to play the game, it ruins the fun and becomes about following the guide you have pulled up on another screen.

However, I would like to propose as a compromise that we do have Tooltip DPS and/or Raw Numbers on the Tooltip. That way it is easy to tell how much you gain or lose by putting on a new piece of gear. Somewhat similar to how Path of Exile does it.

What is everyone's thoughts on this?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

ThexBlackxKnight

The meta will be set with or without damage meters in the game. Players like to number crunch in mmorpgs.

Trax

@Noaani Conversely, I can point to Darkfall which took over a year to develop anything resembling a meta, and even after that it was continually evolving. Anecdotal evidence exists for both positions.

It seems reasonable that there’s a multitude of factors contributing to why, when, and how metas develop, having only played archeage a few short months with low intensity, I’m not really equipped to comment on that particular case. What I can and have commented on is the evolution of other MMOs that employed heavy data analysis and how that analysis changed the game and the culture of those games.

I’m glad we’re I agreement on wanting a variety of play, but it’s hard for me to believe that the existence of a meter won’t be something that is used to for people to point to a build and say “this build useless, get rid of it.” The longer we can prevent the discovery of end game optimization, the better. There is no reason to aid the obsoletion of 55 classes.

The anecdotal evidence of builds being produced in archage beta and persisting for years seems, with all due respect, like a red herring.

Noaani

Trax wrote: »

Noaani Conversely, I can point to Darkfall

Indeed you can.

And I can point out that Darkfall had a higher combat tracker usage than Archeage.

So, between these two games, the one with more people using combat trackers had the more interesting meta

But, I dont think that was the point you were trying to make.

Merek

Why do you need all these grotesque hud elements to know if you're actually killing someone? Sounds like a game flaw rather than something to be happy about.

Noaani

Merek wrote: »

Why do you need all these grotesque hud elements to know if you're actually killing someone? Sounds like a game flaw rather than something to be happy about.

What hud elements?

If you can see a combat tracker during combat, you are using it wrong.

Songcaller

Noaani wrote: »

If you can see a combat tracker during combat, you are using it wrong.

Yeah, out of all the DPS Meters I have used my favourite was a chat link which opened a chat panel and then allowed the sections to be clicked on and browsed. Wasn't seen until the end of a fight.

Noaani

Neurath wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

If you can see a combat tracker during combat, you are using it wrong.

Yeah, out of all the DPS Meters I have used my favourite was a chat link which opened a chat panel and then allowed the sections to be clicked on and browsed. Wasn't seen until the end of a fight.

Mine - not surprisingly - is ACT.

It is it's own application, that you either run in the background and alt tab to, run on a separate monitor, or run on a separate computer.

I always just used to run it in the background, because as you point out, there is literally never a need to look at a combat tracker during a fight.

halbarz

I still do not get why you so badly want a DPS meter, clearly, this is an obsession. The game supports combat logs, which should be more than enough for anyone with a bit of a brain to figure out how to use them.

It should also be a good middle ground for the pro and anti DPS meter sides of this discussion. This whole discussion (10th thread this year about it) is just a ping pong game of demanding a DPS meter or nothing at all.

So why not accept the middle ground already provided by Intrepid and have a game that everyone can enjoy?

Noaani

halbarz wrote: »

a ping pong game of demanding a DPS meter or nothing at all.

I think you have misread the thread a little.

No one is really demanding combat trackers. What we are (or at least, I am) doing is stating outright that there will be combat trackers used with Ashes, and pointing out that it is not in the games best interest to not allow these to be widely used.

Part of pointing that out is explaining why some reasons people have for not wanting them are not really applicable. No one has come forward with a valid reason to not include combat trackers built in to the game - let alone simply allowing third party ones - that isn't built on a demonstrably false assumption.

And by no one, I am including Steven.

Recluse74

Noaani wrote: »

halbarz wrote: »

a ping pong game of demanding a DPS meter or nothing at all.

I think you have misread the thread a little.

No one is really demanding combat trackers. What we are (or at least, I am) doing is stating outright that there will be combat trackers used with Ashes, and pointing out that it is not in the games best interest to not allow these to be widely used.

Part of pointing that out is explaining why some reasons people have for not wanting them are not really applicable. No one has come forward with a valid reason to not include combat trackers built in to the game - let alone simply allowing third party ones - that isn't built on a demonstrably false assumption.

And by no one, I am including Steven.

Reason: Everyone plays on an even playing field with them not in the game.
For those that decide to use them anyway, they risk getting banned. It follows the theme of the game - which is Risk/Reward.

Your argument: If they are included in the game, everyone gets to use them, so even playing field.
Which is not true, because some people refuse to use them, so they are automatically at a disadvantage on day one.

If combat trackers are added, they might as well just take builds out of the game and just have cookie cutter classes that all do the same damage/healing/buffs/AoE and whatnot across the board, because after a year of combat trackers, if not sooner, everyone will be playing close to the same builds anyway... why have diversity if one tool is going to get rid of it?

Tragnar

Like I can completely respect that the only reason why meters shouldn't be in the game is that players don't like them, however you shouldn't argument with made up reasons that "meters cause/promote toxicity" as a reasoning for not wanting them

Just be straight and say - I don't like it so I don't want it

roost

Recluse74 wrote: »

Reason: Everyone plays on an even playing field with them not in the game.
For those that decide to use them anyway, they risk getting banned. It follows the theme of the game - which is Risk/Reward.

Your argument: If they are included in the game, everyone gets to use them, so even playing field.
Which is not true, because some people refuse to use them, so they are automatically at a disadvantage on day one.

If combat trackers are added, they might as well just take builds out of the game and just have cookie cutter classes that all do the same damage/healing/buffs/AoE and whatnot across the board, because after a year of combat trackers, if not sooner, everyone will be playing close to the same builds anyway... why have diversity if one tool is going to get rid of it?

Would absolutely love to hear you explain how they're gonna ban me for reading my own combat log. Or how they'd even be able to tell. Steven already said we will be able to export our combat log and analyze it for our own purposes. That means third party tools will exist. That means DPS meters will exist. You're trying to hard to force your own bygone era of playing onto modern players. Gaming has changed, and you haven't. Let go of the past. You clearly haven't played a game that has made use of combat meters, and likely haven't played any high level of MMO content at all. Your feedback on this topic is nonsensical to the point where I have a difficult time even finding a way to address it in a way that you could comprehend. There have been a lot of extremely great points made in this thread, and you just repeat yourself over and over, ignoring them.

Trying to maintain build diversity by obfuscation is nowhere near sustainable.

Noaani

Recluse74 wrote: »

Your argument: If they are included in the game, everyone gets to use them, so even playing field.
Which is not true, because some people refuse to use them, so they are automatically at a disadvantage on day one.

Somew people in MMO's refuse to group.

By your logic, that means Intrepid shouldn't include group content, because that means people that refuse to use it are not playing on an even playing field.

People that refuse to group have every bit as valid a reason to do so as people that refuse to use a combat tracker.

If it is built in to the game and you refuse to use it, you are making the decision to refuse that even playing field - that doesn't mean an even playing field wasn't offered to you.

Recluse74

No need to explain how people will get banned, as I know not everyone will. You for example may get away with for the life of the game... As I said, there is a risk of getting banned, it is not a certainty that you will.

As for forcing people to play by "my era", I am not trying to do anything.. Steven made the rules, not me, I just choose to abide by them. Which also means you have not read any of my other posts, which basically say if they were available (in game), I would use a personal one. Not calling you out on that, there are quite a few posts to read through to find that info.

As for great points being made.. you do not have to convince me on how well meters work, I know how well they work and that they can be a helpful tool. I am only arguing on the side of the game developer because that is his vision of how how he wants the game to be played. If Steven says he does not want them in game... then so be it, they do not belong in a game where the developer says they do not. I like the fact they will not be in game but also realize that players will use them anyway. If players want to go around the system, they will. It has been a part of playing Pc games since the beginning basically.

Below is not a true story, just an example.

One of my biggest pet peeves in MMOs is having to run a long distance and then realizing I forgot to grab an item I needed. So teleporters, to me, are amazing.... This game will not have a vast teleportation system. I have accepted this and moved on. If they were added on later in the game, I would be very happy, but I understand Steven's reasons on why he does not want them in now, or never. If there was a 3rd party tool that I could download, that would teleport me to wherever I wanted as long as I was not in battle... I would not use it, simply because that is not how the game was built. If I did use a tool like that, we both know people would complain, because it gives me an advantage over those who do not use one. This is how I feel about meters. Again... as stated above, if meters were in game, I would use one for personal use. Just as if teleporters were in game, people would use them as well.

Meters get a player to his Min/Max abilities faster than just playing the game straight up.
Teleport addons get a player to his destination faster than just playing the game straight up.

Again, this was just the quickest example I could come up with that was sorta closely relatable. It is not to be taken seriously, again just an example.

Dygz

Tragnar wrote: »

Like I can completely respect that the only reason why meters shouldn't be in the game is that players don't like them, however you shouldn't argument with made up reasons that "meters cause/promote toxicity" as a reasoning for not wanting them

Just be straight and say - I don't like it so I don't want it

That is what people are saying - they don't like the toxicity it induces so they don't want it.
Most importantly - that's what Steven believes. Which is why he's not including them.

ThexBlackxKnight

Dygz wrote: »

That is what people are saying - they don't like the toxicity it induces so they don't want it.
Most importantly - that's what Steven believes. Which is why he's not including them.

Toxicity will be in the game with or without damage meters , it would really make no difference. Players are going to have access to the combat data, so a meta will happen and gatekeeping , its not something that can be avoided.

Recluse74

Noaani wrote: »

Recluse74 wrote: »

Your argument: If they are included in the game, everyone gets to use them, so even playing field.
Which is not true, because some people refuse to use them, so they are automatically at a disadvantage on day one.

Somew people in MMO's refuse to group.

By your logic, that means Intrepid shouldn't include group content, because that means people that refuse to use it are not playing on an even playing field.

People that refuse to group have every bit as valid a reason to do so as people that refuse to use a combat tracker.

If it is built in to the game and you refuse to use it, you are making the decision to refuse that even playing field - that doesn't mean an even playing field wasn't offered to you.

I definitely see what you are getting at, but group play has been the backbone of almost every MMO ever released, where as meters have not been. So if group play has been a mainstay in that genre, and someone refuses to play in groups, you are correct... it was offered to them. Meters are not the same thing, they are not 100% needed to play the game. They are only 100% needed to play the games that offer you the style of play you like. For example WoW, where meters are, as I hear, 100% needed to compete. But I see what you are getting at.. which is funny, because I gave an example in my post above this one about teleporters which is kinds trying to argue the same thing from the opposite point of view.

Recluse74

ThexBlackxKnight wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

That is what people are saying - they don't like the toxicity it induces so they don't want it.
Most importantly - that's what Steven believes. Which is why he's not including them.

Toxicity will be in the game with or without damage meters , it would really make no difference. Players are going to have access to the combat data, so a meta will happen and gatekeeping , its not something that can be avoided.

If it is all going to happen anyway... then why does there need to be a meter in game? There is another fact in life I can give as well... Everyone on Earth will die, this is a given... this does not mean you give everyone a tool to make it happen faster than it will naturally. Patience will get everyone there in the end.

RocketFarmer

It’s one thing to not include these things in the software Intrepid publishes and to not have 3rd party software arrangements or easy “hooks” into their code and data. It’s something completely different to go after people suspected of using their own combat log parser or even something as simple as a spreadsheet and ban them. That’s at the other end of the toxicity meter. Or worse, promoting actual toxicity for the sake of preventing potential toxicity.

I suspect we’re at the point in this conversation where some are just arguing for the sake of arguing. At least on the point of declaring min-max cheating and calling for bans. Those sound like hyperbolic statements.

So if some feel so strongly about min-maxing, how about no combat logs, no health or damage indicators and keeping all in game feedback more abstract? That way there are no numbers to game the system and therefore no need for parsers. Everything would be by feel or trial and error. So through experience you might know this attack can one shot a cow, but it takes three to bring down a bear. Is this more agreeable for those who are concerned about cheating?

Noaani

Recluse74 wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Recluse74 wrote: »

Your argument: If they are included in the game, everyone gets to use them, so even playing field.
Which is not true, because some people refuse to use them, so they are automatically at a disadvantage on day one.

Somew people in MMO's refuse to group.

By your logic, that means Intrepid shouldn't include group content, because that means people that refuse to use it are not playing on an even playing field.

People that refuse to group have every bit as valid a reason to do so as people that refuse to use a combat tracker.

If it is built in to the game and you refuse to use it, you are making the decision to refuse that even playing field - that doesn't mean an even playing field wasn't offered to you.

I definitely see what you are getting at, but group play has been the backbone of almost every MMO ever released

And combat trackers have been available in every MMO ever released - even the ones that try to make that not so.

Perhaps I should point out that my statement applies to everything in an MMO, not just group content. I have known some ultra-religious people that refused to do any religion based content, which puts them at a disadvantage in many games.

I also had a raid member that couldn't do content with large spiders. This was fine until he needed to kill a large spider on a raid in order to progress through content. This put our whole guild at a disadvantage

Point is, if it is available to all to use, then all have a level playing field. It is what each of us do with that playing field that then matters.

Child Item