Azherae wrote: » Kilion wrote: » Azherae wrote: » So, I was thinking that if Ashes is Easy and not otherwise offensive to my sensibilities, I might play it for way longer than I would play an easy single player game. A PvX MMORPG that isn't too grindy but is technically easy (or just easy for a specific type of person or group) seems like it can go one of two ways. Either the disparity between the 'naturally talented' and the 'not' keeps getting bigger and all the competition becomes similar to grinding to outpace the other 'naturally talented players', which makes it very mechanics/balance dependent... Or basically everyone manages some level of relative success and it becomes more or less a big RP game dependent on its PvE content or roleplaying community. Ashes isn't supposed to be easy, but within gaming, I always say that's a complex claim. The main definition of 'easy' vs 'hard' in games is 'can most people do it' because some humans are mechanical/analytic savants after a while exposed to something. Most games that get around this do it by challenging the aspect of human capability that we (so far) don't think changes easily, your working memory. So just a random thought today. Assume Ashes turns out to be super easy for you personally. So 'easy' that if it were a single player game, you'd probably get bored of it. Are you likely to keep playing it? In a single player game once you've reached the top, there's no more challenge. In an MMORPG though, you gain prestige and power within the game if you happen to find it really easy. Would you 'give that up just because it's not challenging enough?' People who don't play MMORPGs to be challenged, a different question. Do you stop playing significantly challenging single player games even if they are otherwise fun/immersive? It seems to me that something is missing in the assumption here and that is: There is a ton of variety in this game that is impossible to cover alone. The easiest example of that is in the artisan field, where you are only able to master 1 of 3 general fields and in that field only 2 of up to 9 possible jobs. Sure, some aspect of the game might come to you easy, but EVERYTHING being easy? That's for once unlikely but even if it all were easy to you, it's irrelevant because the systems are designed - and it seemed rather clear to me from the statements Intrepid had made so far - that no single player can do it all because there is no time for it while others are making their impact on the world. If solo playing was possible it would mean that Ashes became the absolute opposite of what an MMORPG wants to be. This game is designed to be a group challenge. Thank you, I'll change the OP to say 'you and your group'.
Kilion wrote: » Azherae wrote: » So, I was thinking that if Ashes is Easy and not otherwise offensive to my sensibilities, I might play it for way longer than I would play an easy single player game. A PvX MMORPG that isn't too grindy but is technically easy (or just easy for a specific type of person or group) seems like it can go one of two ways. Either the disparity between the 'naturally talented' and the 'not' keeps getting bigger and all the competition becomes similar to grinding to outpace the other 'naturally talented players', which makes it very mechanics/balance dependent... Or basically everyone manages some level of relative success and it becomes more or less a big RP game dependent on its PvE content or roleplaying community. Ashes isn't supposed to be easy, but within gaming, I always say that's a complex claim. The main definition of 'easy' vs 'hard' in games is 'can most people do it' because some humans are mechanical/analytic savants after a while exposed to something. Most games that get around this do it by challenging the aspect of human capability that we (so far) don't think changes easily, your working memory. So just a random thought today. Assume Ashes turns out to be super easy for you personally. So 'easy' that if it were a single player game, you'd probably get bored of it. Are you likely to keep playing it? In a single player game once you've reached the top, there's no more challenge. In an MMORPG though, you gain prestige and power within the game if you happen to find it really easy. Would you 'give that up just because it's not challenging enough?' People who don't play MMORPGs to be challenged, a different question. Do you stop playing significantly challenging single player games even if they are otherwise fun/immersive? It seems to me that something is missing in the assumption here and that is: There is a ton of variety in this game that is impossible to cover alone. The easiest example of that is in the artisan field, where you are only able to master 1 of 3 general fields and in that field only 2 of up to 9 possible jobs. Sure, some aspect of the game might come to you easy, but EVERYTHING being easy? That's for once unlikely but even if it all were easy to you, it's irrelevant because the systems are designed - and it seemed rather clear to me from the statements Intrepid had made so far - that no single player can do it all because there is no time for it while others are making their impact on the world. If solo playing was possible it would mean that Ashes became the absolute opposite of what an MMORPG wants to be. This game is designed to be a group challenge.
Azherae wrote: » So, I was thinking that if Ashes is Easy and not otherwise offensive to my sensibilities, I might play it for way longer than I would play an easy single player game. A PvX MMORPG that isn't too grindy but is technically easy (or just easy for a specific type of person or group) seems like it can go one of two ways. Either the disparity between the 'naturally talented' and the 'not' keeps getting bigger and all the competition becomes similar to grinding to outpace the other 'naturally talented players', which makes it very mechanics/balance dependent... Or basically everyone manages some level of relative success and it becomes more or less a big RP game dependent on its PvE content or roleplaying community. Ashes isn't supposed to be easy, but within gaming, I always say that's a complex claim. The main definition of 'easy' vs 'hard' in games is 'can most people do it' because some humans are mechanical/analytic savants after a while exposed to something. Most games that get around this do it by challenging the aspect of human capability that we (so far) don't think changes easily, your working memory. So just a random thought today. Assume Ashes turns out to be super easy for you personally. So 'easy' that if it were a single player game, you'd probably get bored of it. Are you likely to keep playing it? In a single player game once you've reached the top, there's no more challenge. In an MMORPG though, you gain prestige and power within the game if you happen to find it really easy. Would you 'give that up just because it's not challenging enough?' People who don't play MMORPGs to be challenged, a different question. Do you stop playing significantly challenging single player games even if they are otherwise fun/immersive?
Kilion wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Kilion wrote: » Azherae wrote: » So, I was thinking that if Ashes is Easy and not otherwise offensive to my sensibilities, I might play it for way longer than I would play an easy single player game. A PvX MMORPG that isn't too grindy but is technically easy (or just easy for a specific type of person or group) seems like it can go one of two ways. Either the disparity between the 'naturally talented' and the 'not' keeps getting bigger and all the competition becomes similar to grinding to outpace the other 'naturally talented players', which makes it very mechanics/balance dependent... Or basically everyone manages some level of relative success and it becomes more or less a big RP game dependent on its PvE content or roleplaying community. Ashes isn't supposed to be easy, but within gaming, I always say that's a complex claim. The main definition of 'easy' vs 'hard' in games is 'can most people do it' because some humans are mechanical/analytic savants after a while exposed to something. Most games that get around this do it by challenging the aspect of human capability that we (so far) don't think changes easily, your working memory. So just a random thought today. Assume Ashes turns out to be super easy for you personally. So 'easy' that if it were a single player game, you'd probably get bored of it. Are you likely to keep playing it? In a single player game once you've reached the top, there's no more challenge. In an MMORPG though, you gain prestige and power within the game if you happen to find it really easy. Would you 'give that up just because it's not challenging enough?' People who don't play MMORPGs to be challenged, a different question. Do you stop playing significantly challenging single player games even if they are otherwise fun/immersive? It seems to me that something is missing in the assumption here and that is: There is a ton of variety in this game that is impossible to cover alone. The easiest example of that is in the artisan field, where you are only able to master 1 of 3 general fields and in that field only 2 of up to 9 possible jobs. Sure, some aspect of the game might come to you easy, but EVERYTHING being easy? That's for once unlikely but even if it all were easy to you, it's irrelevant because the systems are designed - and it seemed rather clear to me from the statements Intrepid had made so far - that no single player can do it all because there is no time for it while others are making their impact on the world. If solo playing was possible it would mean that Ashes became the absolute opposite of what an MMORPG wants to be. This game is designed to be a group challenge. Thank you, I'll change the OP to say 'you and your group'. I thought about the changed question again and came to this conclusion: I could still see myself very much enjoying such a game, provided that the story is engaging to me. Sure, under the given premise it won't be very difficult make the steps forward, but they still have to be made, it still will take time and some form of effort to actually do it and along this path I can get served juicy bits of lore. If the story fragments are spread around the world and require big nodes to be in their vicinity to be unlocked it would mean me and my group still have quite the task at our hands: Build up a node to a metropolis to find the story pieces in that region, then tear it down and motivate the masses to build up a new metropolis at the next spot where we suspect more important pieces of the story to be hidden. Doing that alone would - with the time constrains on building a metropolis - mean years of game play, which in that time will expand and change with expansions and patches. Basically a good, engaging story with alluring mysteries in Ashes could motivate me to manipulate the whole server to help me unveil the these bits of story. And because that already makes me sound like a science-villian from almost every movie, it would probably result in the push back against my plans to tear down what others have come to hold dear - like their freeholds and cities. So I think just because the game mechanics might come easy to some there is still a lot of room left for players to enjoy themselves for years.
Azherae wrote: » I know NiKr can enjoy this for some reason, James might have been implying the opposite. What about you? If you can play perfectly against a boss, and the difference is that if you take off half your armor you lose and if you don't you win (even considering that you have to change strategy when you take off the armor, but you still are playing perfectly relative to half-armor), is this more challenging and THEREFORE more fun/engaging? When you get good enough at half-armor do you take off all but one piece? At some point it becomes impossible to do even when playing perfectly because this is an MMORPG. The gear is part of the point. Taking the gear off is explicitly 'not playing well' in many cases. Taking less people than intended to a fight is a challenge but you can only lower that number to one. But I'm still asking, I guess, do you personally enjoy that anyway, or even 'think that people who are not challenged should generally just spend their time attempting to do that which might be actually impossible with handicaps'? Can't say you'd be wrong, after all, that's just 'the difference between me and NiKr'.
Neurath wrote: » I'd rather have a hard game that's easier to play than an easy game that's hard to play. Thus, I believe I can be put off by control systems that are difficult to use rather than enthused by the difficulty of overcoming the control system just to be mediocre.
Dygz wrote: » I don't understand why a single-player RPG would be so boring that I stop playing. I play MMORPGs so that I can see how other players are playing and so we can cooperate to defeat mobs and NPCs. Together, we can emulate the stories in Fantasy and Sci-Fi novels. In terms of Easy v Hard... My playstyle is Casual Challenge/Hardcore Time. So... I'm going to spend more time playing a Casual Challenge RPG than a Hardcore Challenge RPG, because I'm more interested in the RP aspect of RPG than I am the Game aspect of RPG. Which is why I refer to myself as a player, rather than as a gamer. I can't think of a single-player RPG that I found so Hardcore Challenge I couldn't/wouldn't finish it. But, sure, I suppose it's not impossible for one to be created. MMORPGs typically just become too tedious to play - and then I wait for that content to be nerfed or an expansion to provide gear that allows me to complete the Hardcore content. Of course... I consider PvP to be a form of Hardcore Challenge which I can only stomach for short periods of time, so...
Azherae wrote: » Would it be fair to say that you don't care how 'low' the challenge rating drops for games?
Azherae wrote: » I believe that a person can still have fun choosing a character style, performing the actions for that character style to live out the class fantasy of it, and still entirely enjoy it, so I am not surprised, but I want to make sure I don't misunderstand you.
Azherae wrote: » A single player or small group game, that still counts as an RPG because you have chosen a way of existence/role within the group/game world, but that contains minimal challenge of ANY kind and basically tells you the story of the character like a book and you occasionally press a button to confirm or start an event...
Azherae wrote: » This can hold your attention too, you don't find yourself 'wishing that the game were more challenging', right?
Azherae wrote: » I am not one of those lucky people who can 'attempt to do a known impossible thing and derive joy from failing at it'. The joy is knowing that I COULD win if I did it perfectly. Once I can do it perfectly, that's it, and depending on the game's complexity, PvE and sometimes PvP can just be 'done perfectly'. When there is nothing you could do better, I'd hope you were winning or that your opponent was in the same boat at which point the Balance Team or the RNG is the one deciding the outcome. Because of the way I experience games, to me this still counts as 'easy', I'm just spending my time doing something easy and still losing. I know NiKr can enjoy this for some reason.
NiKr wrote: » Azherae wrote: » I am not one of those lucky people who can 'attempt to do a known impossible thing and derive joy from failing at it'. The joy is knowing that I COULD win if I did it perfectly. Once I can do it perfectly, that's it, and depending on the game's complexity, PvE and sometimes PvP can just be 'done perfectly'. When there is nothing you could do better, I'd hope you were winning or that your opponent was in the same boat at which point the Balance Team or the RNG is the one deciding the outcome. Because of the way I experience games, to me this still counts as 'easy', I'm just spending my time doing something easy and still losing. I know NiKr can enjoy this for some reason. I think it's because to me it becomes a puzzle of "finding the lowest limit of my power that's still enough to clear the content". In the context of the game being super easy, you'd already have cleared all the content in the game, so, if you then had to redo that content - you'd be playing a sandbox of "make your own fun". And removing gear is not really necessary in an mmo. You can go down in tiers, you can limit the amount of resources you have (if they come into play during the content), you can limit the abilities you use. You, pretty much, just become your own biggest enemy. And any potential rng just blurs the line of the possible, but that is the case with pretty much all content (if it has rng of course). In other words, I play my own game within the game that devs made for me I find it quite interesting that you don't really like this kind of approach to sandboxy games. Though I guess that's just the difference in the games we play and, most likely, our skill lvls.
Azherae wrote: » What I CAN say I disagree with, to an extent, is 'limiting the abilities I use'. Because 'holding back on the Class Fantasy roleplay that I built up on my character' kinda isn't the point? If I 'refused to use my best damage attack' in a game to 'challenge myself', there's only a few game types/situations where this would make the experience more fun for me. After a while, it would definitely feel like it was in my best interest to find a different game, except for the aforementioned aspect. I could maintain 'prestige and power' or 'RolePlay opportunities'.
