Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
This Forum is Read Only

exp loss??Follow

#1 Aug 21 2009 at 3:42 PM Rating: Decent
**
602 posts
http://www.ffxivcore.com/index.php?/topic/484-exclusive-interview-with-ffxiv-producer-hiromichi-tanaka/

Can we expect exp loss?

We're still adjusting and discussing this. It may or may not be an exp-loss when you die in FFXIV. But it will be a lot less than it's in FFXI. However, as said we might not include an exp loss at all in FFXIV. In the alpha version we have exp loss currently, but this is still being adjusted, since it's an alpha version. So it's not decided on.

This is a quote from an inetview, hmm. I thought their was no exp in FFXIV. I guess they might have it in after all....

Edited, Aug 21st 2009 7:47pm by Frebaut
____________________________
BANNED

#2 Aug 21 2009 at 3:57 PM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
Probably skill/durability loss.
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#3 Aug 21 2009 at 5:08 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
737 posts
Yes, what Kirbster said. Your weapon will be the item getting "experience/skill". Die and most likely the durability gets an added punishment to it.

Got to love marketing!
____________________________
#4Frebaut, Posted: Aug 22 2009 at 1:35 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) No it says exp loss, not weapon loss read it again. The whole commet is about exp, not weapon loss or deteration.
#5 Aug 22 2009 at 2:03 AM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
Considering there is no exp aside from skill you gain in weapons, I think you're taking this much too literally.
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#6 Aug 22 2009 at 2:57 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
253 posts
Will we be expecting the following hyper-aggressive spams...

"Excuse me for bothering you. Weapon/Armor POWERLEVELING SERVICE. 100% guarantee safe. Only $59 to max out each piece of equipment."

(V_V)
____________________________
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
We are the BLU. Lower your shields and power down your weapons. You will be assimilated. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Resistance is futile
#7 Aug 22 2009 at 6:50 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,481 posts
Kirbster wrote:
Considering there is no exp aside from skill you gain in weapons, I think you're taking this much too literally.
or the translator wasn't careful enough, yeah
____________________________
Quote:
I don't believe in good guys versus bad guys anymore… I only see a plethora of states acting in self interest… with varying ethics and moral standards of course, but self-interest nonetheless
Winston Churchill wrote:
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things
#8 Aug 22 2009 at 7:56 AM Rating: Decent
**
340 posts
They've said as well there will be item decay which will likely be worse on death. I would expect the death penalty to be more tied in to that ala EQ2.
____________________________
RJO
----
Guild Leader - Aureus Knights
#9 Aug 22 2009 at 7:58 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
One of the interviews said there may or may not be something like exp loss, but it wouldn't be as severe as it was in XI. There was exp loss in the alpha version.

Very good news imo.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#10 Aug 22 2009 at 1:58 PM Rating: Decent
**
879 posts
I wouldn't mind xp loss if they made a few adjustments to it, like disabling the "level down" and instead putting you to 0 xp if you would've had a "level down".
____________________________
Spiderpalm, level 32 Undead Warlock of the server Lightbringer.
#11 Aug 22 2009 at 5:42 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
Avatar
26 posts
One thing that bothers me about FFXI was the exp loss. Having spent hours apon hours grinding in some deep dark cave to die only once and lose all that xp I gained.

I can only hope that the xp loss is far less taxing.
____________________________

~Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are chrunchy and taste good with ketchup.~

~Exploring Vana'Diel Since Oct. 29th 2003~
#12 Aug 22 2009 at 6:05 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
737 posts
As a former Beastmaster. I once lost a ******** of experience 4 times in a row within an hour (Actually many times). The first time happens when it's a new camp. The second time I got trapped by a pop. The third I forgot to think. And the fourth because I lost my mind and threw my controller against the wall.

I don't mind losing experience as long as no deleveling. Like said below:

Izaacpaul wrote:
I wouldn't mind xp loss if they made a few adjustments to it, like disabling the "level down" and instead putting you to 0 xp if you would've had a "level down".


Leveling down is like being **** on. And no normal person likes being **** on. It's not fun and drives the player base to take specific known practices which do not result in fun. I want to take chances and test my might or skills but not be punished extremely. Reward failure by not being able to delevel.

the end
____________________________
#13 Aug 22 2009 at 6:11 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
The problem with xp loss in XI was twofold:

1) XP was already a complete grind, so in addition to the other death penalties (having to get a raise, waiting for weakness, loss of food), you knew that you were going to be subjected to that much more tedious xp grinding to recoup the loss.

2) For a lot of events, deaths were basically inevitable. Some events ensured that you would die multiple times, really almost regardless of how good you or your group were.

So xp loss would not be as big of a deal if recovering was less of a grind (and not a penalty compiled upon other penalties), and if death were more avoidable. In a completely new game, both of those are very possible.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#14 Aug 22 2009 at 7:03 PM Rating: Good
****
7,106 posts
There has to be a penalty for dying, and it has to be severe enough that the player really doesn't want to die. Anything else and there's no reason to worry about dying, and suddenly half of the tension and challenge of the game is gone.

So, we can be pretty damned sure that FFIV will have a penalty for dying, and it will be severe enough that dying a bunch of times in a row will suck, just like it did in FFXI. Maybe we won't lose EXP, but we'll lose something, and people will complain about it because some people don't like to take even a small step backwards.
#15 Aug 22 2009 at 7:12 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
977 posts
I didn't mind the exp loss in FFXI, it made the game way more exciting, and partially prevented people from being dumbasses.
____________________________
A drink. A drink. A drink.
#16 Aug 22 2009 at 7:32 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
737 posts
Caesura wrote:
So, we can be pretty damned sure that FFIV will have a penalty for dying, and it will be severe enough that dying a bunch of times in a row will suck, just like it did in FFXI. Maybe we won't lose EXP, but we'll lose something, and people will complain about it because some people don't like to take even a small step backwards.


I don't recall losing 4 hours of experience as a "small" step backwards, it's a waste of time. Keep me at 0 of said level instead of deleveling. Sure there has to be a penalty. But one so great as FFXI is just going to lead to cookie cutter tactics. Simply because no one will want to try something different once a well know way of gaining skill is attained. You have to fail many times to succeed once. No one wants to fail... and that's the problem.

I'm already happy that the punishment for death won't be so severe. And it shouldn't be with the durability equation added also.
____________________________
#17 Aug 22 2009 at 11:45 PM Rating: Excellent
****
7,106 posts
Quote:
I don't recall losing 4 hours of experience as a "small" step backwards

I'd love to hear how you've lost four hours of EXP enough times while playing FFXI for it to meaningfully matter. Even the most inefficient solo BST would have to die a good eight times in a row for that to happen (and homepoint each time), and any other job would have to die even more than that. As much as I find losing EXP upon death frustrating, I can't help but think that anyone who repeats unsuccessful behaviour that many times kind of has it coming.

Even in the worst days of Dynamis, back when full wipes were common and 5k/hour was acceptable in a merit party, it would be a challenge to lose four hours of EXP. If it was happening consistently, something was very wrong.

My personal "lose a ton of EXP" story is the CoP airship fight. Man, my group spent hours and hours losing to that fight. We must have easily died enough times to lose four hours of EXP each, probably a fair bit more. But, man it felt good to finally beat that fight. I don't think any of us cared how much gil and EXP it cost us; it was so worth it to finally win. And, that happened once, in five years of playing. At no other time, in CoP, Dynamis, anywhere, did I ever come close to losing four hours of EXP in one session.
#18 Aug 23 2009 at 12:13 AM Rating: Good
2 posts
I doubt they will make the exp loss as substantial as it was in FF11. If I was a betting man I would say that de-leveling will not be put into FF14. Here's why I think so..

They've said this will be for people who want to come in and play just a few minutes, to several hours.

Okay given that statement, you're going to have to be able to solo, or rather find someone else maybe and kill stuff, complete a leve, something game play wise where the risk is low that you don't have to commit to hours of finding the right group to get a benefit out of the game (in exp form). The risk / reward status-quo will have to be substantially lower to allow people to solo and still get meaningful playtime. I'm not saying group/raid play won't be forefront and spectacular - and you'll do much better in those situations exp wise.

However I don't think they are going to penalize someone for not being able to kill a bee, at level 3, and de-level. That drives away people, and SE isn't stupid, they want to attract people of all sorts.. basically kill WoW.


#19 Aug 23 2009 at 2:01 AM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
Quote:
There has to be a penalty for dying, and it has to be severe enough that the player really doesn't want to die. Anything else and there's no reason to worry about dying, and suddenly half of the tension and challenge of the game is gone.


I really must agree with this. There has to be a severe enough penalty for dying to have to worry about dying, but not enough of a penalty to discourage experimentation.


Deleveling was really the only problem I had with XI, and leveling BST desensitized me to deleveling to the point where I wouldn't bat an eye.
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#20 Aug 23 2009 at 8:05 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
There has to be a penalty for dying, and it has to be severe enough that the player really doesn't want to die. Anything else and there's no reason to worry about dying, and suddenly half of the tension and challenge of the game is gone.


I could hardly disagree more.

Nobody wants to die as a matter of player pride anyway. This idea that there has to be some reason for people to not want to die ignores the most basic psychological element of gaming-- people already don't want to die. Any minor inconvenience beyond that merely reinforces their desire to not die. It doesn't take much.

A little wasted time is an effective deterrent to death, even if it's only a couple of minutes. How do you think most games work? Even in games where you can attempt a battle as many times as you like without penalty, it's not as if people are trying to die.

What causes this kind of completely baseless concern? Is it stuff like death-warping? Because greater death penalties are not the solution to a flaw in the travel design.

As best I can tell, the idea is to discourage people from attempting battles they aren't ready for. Sounds fair enough in theory, but in practice, all this does is discourage players from being adventurous and from taking on challenges with anything less than the ideal. These are AWFUL game practices.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#21 Aug 23 2009 at 8:35 AM Rating: Good
**
456 posts
Quote:
I could hardly disagree more.

Nobody wants to die as a matter of player pride anyway. This idea that there has to be some reason for people to not want to die ignores the most basic psychological element of gaming-- people already don't want to die. Any minor inconvenience beyond that merely reinforces their desire to not die. It doesn't take much.


I have to completely disagree with this comment.

If you are not penalized for dying then no player would care if they die or not. This pride thing in a video game has no back bone. Many people (including myself) die many times on single rpg games, you just turn the game off and try again, and you don't care. So what you died, just keep trying until you win, and that is how it will be. People could careless about dieing as long as they are not penalized for dying. You think pride will make people care about dying if they is not penalized? No, People die and lose all the time on single player games and they don't care, and why would they care. It is a game, and with no penalty you just keep trying until you finally win.

Even with the ffxi penalty (even though I didn't think it was severe anyway), many people was adventurous and did crazy things all the time. If people was really scared to experiment then manaburns, mnk burns, and melee burns would have never became popular. It takes experimenting and thinking outside the box and actually attempting it, to create a lot of the strateges and things that happens in ffxi now.

I never seen a player just walk past a new NM, or anything because they was scared of the "severe" death penalty. I never seen anyone discouraged and didn't go to a new area because they was scared of the "severe" death penalty. I did see people plan and think before maybe going there, but I didn't see people totally discouraged and just didn't go somewhere because of the death penalty. They might have brought RR, and buffed up, and had a plan incase they got aggroed but I never seen someone that just didn't go because they was scared of the death penalty.
#22 Aug 23 2009 at 8:49 AM Rating: Good
***
1,049 posts
I feel as if most of the people complaining about the death penalty in FFXI didn't play it for very long, but it could be a completely baseless judgment. Losing exp wasn't too bad, even for someone who didn't party very often. Often a few campaigns would get me enough exp to last for a long while. A Raise III would only lose you about 300 exp, and even without raise, it capped at 2400. Once they took away exp loss from mission battles, it was almost perfected.

I've played too many MMOs that have equipment loss and other negatives to complain about FFXI's death system. When you play an MMO, play for a month or two, and die only to lose most of your gear... I've quit an MMO or two because of that, and I'm a very non-gear-centric player.

That's all...
#23 Aug 23 2009 at 8:55 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,481 posts
Quote:
If you are not penalized for dying then no player would care if they die or not.
In FFXI the exp loss was light enough where experienced players didn't give a ****, but it drove away less experienced players who felt they been punished with multiple wasted hours for things that often weren't their fault. It was the absolute worst of both worlds. Given than seasoned players are going to stop caring regardless, it's better to have a fairly minor penalty so you don't drive away new players.

Nothing was a worse design decision in Lineage II than the death penalty, where you could loose literally days worth of exp as well as drop pieces of your gear. It didn't prevent people from dying that much more, it just made them neurotic and **** about everything (which leads to like "we're only willing to take X specific jobs to Y event" bullsh*t) or soo frustrated when they died that they flat out quit.

IMO minor repairable durability loss or 5-min of raise sickness or having to walk from a spawn point back to wherever you died is bad enough.

Edited, Aug 23rd 2009 12:55pm by shintasama
____________________________
Quote:
I don't believe in good guys versus bad guys anymore… I only see a plethora of states acting in self interest… with varying ethics and moral standards of course, but self-interest nonetheless
Winston Churchill wrote:
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things
#24 Aug 23 2009 at 8:57 AM Rating: Excellent
**
736 posts

I'd have to disagree with you Kachi.
I think there's a host of secondary effects to a death penalty that can be beneficial to a playerbase.

http://www.eldergame.com/2007/12/17/whats-in-a-death-penalty






#25 Aug 23 2009 at 8:58 AM Rating: Good
****
7,106 posts
Quote:
This idea that there has to be some reason for people to not want to die ignores the most basic psychological element of gaming-- people already don't want to die.

Nobody wants to die in a game, but without a penalty they don't care much either. Have you ever played the home version of a quarter-muncher like Gauntlet or Turtles in Time? When you have unlimited continues, the games lose a good part of their zing. Trying to save that next quarter for as long as possible was a good chunk of the arcade games' appeal, and the moment it didn't matter the games became just a mechanical exercise in walking forward and stabbing enemies. I spent hours and hours and hours playing Gauntlet in the arcade; my friends and I played the home version once and never came back to it.
#26 Aug 23 2009 at 9:15 AM Rating: Decent
*
237 posts
Try not to think of exp loss in FFXI standards.

FFXI: You lose 10% of your TNL upon death you get a what?: 50% back for a raise 1 and like 90% back with r3? (I can't remember.) But the biggest downer was that you had to get an EXP grp to make that lost EXP up. So that meant long wait time to form a PT , a hour+ (depending on how many times you died) of mob grinding.

In FFXIV if you lose some exp on death, you can make it up solo. Guilleves that are made for the solo player will most likely be adjusted in the players favor to gain fast/easy exp. SO maybe if you lose 10% of your TNL and not get a raise all you have to do is crank out a 30 min guildleve and you're right as rain.

I say leave exp loss, leave the level down. It'll be much easier to make up for it this time around.

All the other MMO's i've played; FFXI was the one I didn't want to die in (besides L2, dieing really sucked in that game) and I loved it for that! other MMOs I used death as a fast warp back to town, a short cut to turn in a quest. to run in head strong into the RvR zerg. The whole time not caring about the penalty for being careless, or lazy.

I'd much rather suffer a penalty I can make up through gameplay instead of paying out of pocket for gear repair or stat restoration. That money is for that finest cooks and craftsmen of Eorzea =)
____________________________
FFXIV has it's first official RMT'r: Zyuu
#27 Aug 23 2009 at 9:25 AM Rating: Good
**
456 posts
Quote:
I feel as if most of the people complaining about the death penalty in FFXI didn't play it for very long, but it could be a completely baseless judgment. Losing exp wasn't too bad, even for someone who didn't party very often. Often a few campaigns would get me enough exp to last for a long while. A Raise III would only lose you about 300 exp, and even without raise, it capped at 2400. Once they took away exp loss from mission battles, it was almost perfected.

I've played too many MMOs that have equipment loss and other negatives to complain about FFXI's death system. When you play an MMO, play for a month or two, and die only to lose most of your gear... I've quit an MMO or two because of that, and I'm a very non-gear-centric player.

That's all...


I was feeling this way also, and I don't see how most people can be ok with exp lost but not ok with leveling down. I understand its annoying to level down, but lets not overexaggerate and blow this out of proportion. When you leveled down, most people acted like they took your whole exp bar and made you exp the whole level again. All they did was take the exp it was suppose too, and you just didn't have enough to take the hit. Most people would get their level back in 1 or 2 fights, (so like 30seconds of their time).

Then you have to realize that having exp lost with no leveling down would be pointless. People would just get their level and wouldn't worry about dying. A penalty that no player cares about for half the time is pointless. Why put exp lost in the game if everybody is just going to get their level and don't care about dying anymore.

Wanting and caring is two different things. You will not say, yay, I want to lose and die, but that doesn't mean you would care if you did die either. You would just start over and try again and wouldn't care, just like most single player games. Then their are the people that love to be risk takers, and no penalty just kills the game for them. Its kind of like gambling, but if you could never lose. This would be a turn off for a lot of people, even if it doesn't seem like that. The reason why a lot of people gamble, is because of the risk thats involved with gambling.

The penalty doesn't have to be severe, but I didn't see ffxi penalty as anywhere near severe. I think the reason why most people see it as "severe", is because it usually took a party to get your exp back. At a higher level you could do campaign or something, but their wasn't much else you could do at a lower level besides a party. This will change in ffxiv, as they have said you can solo and progress just not as fast as a group. If you could solo and progress in ffxi (much faster), then I think many people wouldn't see ffxi penalty as being "severe". This is just my outlook on it and maybe people would still see it as "severe".

Edited, Aug 23rd 2009 1:27pm by HocusP
#28 Aug 23 2009 at 9:33 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
@Zemzelette; That's an interesting article, though I have to say that I disagree with some of it's most basic premises. I don't see any new ammo in it that damns anything I've already said, either.

Actually, the author seems to agree that lenient is better.

Quote:

Nobody wants to die in a game, but without a penalty they don't care much either.


See, but when someone says they "care" what is that really saying? Generally it's saying that it frustrates them. And that seems to hark back to this misconception that frustration=challenge, when the two have only a tenuous correlation.

So I'll ask you this-- is the point of making players "care" about not dying:
A) So that they'll actively avoid trying to die.
B) So that dying will aggravate them.

Because I have to say that I have little interest in playing a game in which a part of the so-called appeal is masochistic by nature, and an unfathomably large group of players and potential players feel the same way.

The thing is, the severity of the death penalty differs for everyone. There are people who feel that the penalty in XI is far too lenient and others who feel it is far too harsh... the majority feel that it's the latter. The more severe you make it, the further you isolate the people who don't have these masochistic desires to be punished for making mistakes. This is psych 101 stuff, guys. But I guess in light of the fact that FFXI was a somewhat sadistic game, it's not surprising that a number of the current fanbase feel that way.

Quote:
I never seen a

bunch of things that I saw all the time. I don't put a lot of stake in your personal experiences, because you always seem to (conveniently) not see flaws in FFXI that other people have talked about since day 1.

Seriously, read a "goodbye" thread every once in a while.

Edited, Aug 23rd 2009 10:38am by Kachi
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#29 Aug 23 2009 at 9:52 AM Rating: Decent
**
456 posts
Quote:
the majority feel that it's the latter. The more severe you make it, the further you isolate the people who don't have these masochistic desires to be punished for making mistakes. This is psych 101 stuff, guys. But I guess in light of the fact that FFXI was a somewhat sadistic game, it's not surprising that a number of the current fanbase feel that way.


The majority people you talk to feel that way, but not the majority as a whole (so stop saying that).


Quote:
See, but when someone says they "care" what is that really saying? Generally it's saying that it frustrates them. And that seems to hark back to this misconception that frustration=challenge, when the two have only a tenuous correlation.

So I'll ask you this-- is the point of making players "care" about not dying:
A) So that they'll actively avoid trying to die.
B) So that dying will aggravate them.


If you don't make people care about dying then, its just a oops I died, O well type of thing. This results in people just dying because nothing will happen to them. This results in people not caring about any battles and if they die then just o well, until they finally win. This results in just dying when you want to, and not thinking twice about any actions you do in the game. This results in a very boring (no risk at all), and bland game for a lot of people also. This results in the reason why I don't play many single player games at all (I play a few), because they are boring and includes no risk.

Quote:
bunch of things that I saw all the time. I don't put a lot of stake in your personal experiences, because you always seem to (conveniently) not see flaws in FFXI that other people have talked about since day 1.

Seriously, read a "goodbye" thread every once in a while.


Like I said I never seen it. People see a new NM, they try it with friends. When new areas are added, people are in their exploring it right away. When new missions are added, people are in their doing the bcs, right away. If it discouraged people, then none of this would ever happen, because people would be to scared to do any of this because of the death penalty. Like I said, if what you said were true, then manaburns, mnk burns, and melee burns would have never became popular. People would have been too discouraged to ever try such a thing.

Edited, Aug 23rd 2009 1:59pm by HocusP
#30 Aug 23 2009 at 9:54 AM Rating: Excellent
**
736 posts
@Kachi
I mostly agree with your "more lenient that XI" argument. But not the "penalty should just be a little wasted time" part. IMHO, Something between XI and WoW seems pretty good for the softcore target audience SE seems to be courting. I think they could make it harsh enough to promote group play and appease the former-XI sect, but soft enough to encourage more experimentation and please the Casual crowd.

Personally speaking, being a habitual healer, I have a vested interest in things that promote group play. So I'd want the penalty to be harsh enough to help maintain the group dynamic in spite of a solo-oriented gameplay. Being a casual player, I don't want to maintain the group dynamic so much that solo progression becomes worthless. So making solo play worthwhile, yet more "dangerous" by including a harsher-than-WoW death penalty, would be just right. While that's all a very selfish reason to argue for it, I think that approach ends up working pretty well. (Or maybe I'm just biased)


/edit: ninja edit.



Edited, Aug 23rd 2009 2:32pm by Zemzelette
#31 Aug 23 2009 at 10:07 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
6,481 posts
Quote:
If you don't make people care about dying then,
The only way to make "everyone" care about dying is to make the penalty soo harsh the game is unplayable, at which point no one plays and and thus "nobody" cares about dying.
____________________________
Quote:
I don't believe in good guys versus bad guys anymore… I only see a plethora of states acting in self interest… with varying ethics and moral standards of course, but self-interest nonetheless
Winston Churchill wrote:
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things
#32 Aug 23 2009 at 10:12 AM Rating: Decent
**
456 posts
Quote:
The only way to make "everyone" care about dying is to make the penalty soo harsh the game is unplayable, at which point no one plays and and thus "nobody" cares about dying.


I think ffxi had the right balance. People cared about dying and it was not unplayable, so I don't see your point. People cared about dying but still did everything in the game. Most people (But I did a few times) didn't death warp on a main job, and switching to a low level job to death warp showed you cared. It might also have shown that you needed more ways to warp home but thats a different issue. Low levels cared about dieing and high levels cared also or they wouldn't bother getting a buffer. The more buffer you had the less you cared about dying, but since buffer capped, everybody still cared about dying.

Quote:
All the other MMO's i've played; FFXI was the one I didn't want to die in (besides L2, dieing really sucked in that game) and I loved it for that! other MMOs I used death as a fast warp back to town, a short cut to turn in a quest. to run in head strong into the RvR zerg. The whole time not caring about the penalty for being careless, or lazy.


See thier are other games that you wouldn't even bother switching jobs (if you could) and you would just die anywhere. That is the difference between "caring and "not caring". FFXi was far from unplayable, and I don't see your point here.

Edited, Aug 23rd 2009 2:20pm by HocusP

Edited, Aug 23rd 2009 2:24pm by HocusP
#33 Aug 23 2009 at 11:04 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
6,481 posts
Quote:
People cared about dying and it was not unplayable, so I don't see your point.
Bullsh*t, the people in my end game shells are seasoned enough not to give a **** about dying anymore (save a couple whiny BLMs I know). We'll eat R1s if it will get us back in the fight faster, push our hate to the point where tanks have to struggle to keep up, and fight weakened if we think it will get mob X killed faster, then do a meritpo and get capped buffer again in no time.

The problem is there is a spectrum, newer players still do care. It takes them longer to get experience, it takes them longer to get parties, they're easily frustrated with lack of quick forward progress, and they don't have the resources for raise items or other players to raise them. In the end it discourages exploration and innovation in the segment of the population who needs it most to be entertained (seasoned endgame players don't require nearly as much innovation, we're satisfied with carrot on a stick gear). These new players get stuck in a "this is how to do it" mentality which unfortunately far to often tends to carry over for awhile once they reach endgame making them believe X setup is the only way to get Y done. I've know plenty of players (some of them IRL friends) who quit (or it contributed to their quitting) because of this issue.

You can't make seasoned players care without alienating newer players, and since seasoned players aren't likely too quit over it, SE should have light penalties to favor to newer/inexperienced/untalented players. It's just good business sense.

Quote:
switching to a low level job to death warp showed you cared.
really, it showed that I was too impatient to wait 10min for a low leveled mob to beat my 75s to death, lol

Edited, Aug 23rd 2009 3:06pm by shintasama
____________________________
Quote:
I don't believe in good guys versus bad guys anymore… I only see a plethora of states acting in self interest… with varying ethics and moral standards of course, but self-interest nonetheless
Winston Churchill wrote:
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things
#34 Aug 23 2009 at 11:12 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
The majority people you talk to feel that way, but not the majority as a whole (so stop saying that).


The thing you seem to not understand is that you are also claiming to speak for the majority, but how long have you been around, and how long have I? I think I have a far better grasp of the average player and the existing fanbase than you. I see what not only the current XI players think, but I also saw what all the people who quit FFXI very early in its life cycle thought, nevermind the myriad other games that enter the equation. And no, there's no way I'd believe that you've been lurking all this time, because if you were you could not disagree with my statements conscientiously.

So I'll stop saying it once it ceases to be true.

It's gotten to the point where I just don't bother arguing with your opinions because they're so consistently and obviously wrong to anyone who is even slightly objective and knowledgeable.

Quote:
But not the "penalty should just be a little wasted time" part.


Well the thing is, all penalties are wasted time at their core. If you lose xp, that's lost time. Lose money, that's also lost time. It's a setback to your progress. The medium for the lost time isn't especially important to me, as long as it's not excessive or excruciating. I wouldn't care if dying involved a sliding puzzle minigame that you had to complete before being resurrected.

As for your comments about grouping, your raise a valid concern, but are you familiar with behaviorism? Essentially behaviorism deals with systems of punishments and rewards, but frequently when people attempt to develop behavioristic systems, they focus too heavily on punishments while forgetting the importance of providing rewards for desired behaviors. I'll spare you the analysis of this tendency, but I think you get what I'm saying? Rewarding players for grouping is the solution here.

FFXI does this to an extent. Curiously, it also greatly under-rewards for more challenging battles by capping xp and not scaling up. This is one example of how people often aim for the most rewarding behavior without much consideration for punishment. People still solo at times for the personal challenge or for the casual convenience, but the impetus is on grouping because of the reward scale.

Besides, for a competent player who has the option to solo, grouping is by far the more dangerous option, because an incompetent group will get you killed.

Anyway, my biggest beef with that article was the notion that death penalty= challenge. The challenge is what happens in the battle-- how challenging it is to win or lose-- not what happens after the battle. I've said it a million times, but "challenging" people with an xp loss only challenges their patience.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#35 Aug 23 2009 at 11:12 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
737 posts
Caesura wrote:
I'd love to hear how you've lost four hours of EXP enough times while playing FFXI for it to meaningfully matter. Even the most inefficient solo BST would have to die a good eight times in a row for that to happen (and homepoint each time), and any other job would have to die even more than that. As much as I find losing EXP upon death frustrating, I can't help but think that anyone who repeats unsuccessful behaviour that many times kind of has it coming.


Efficient BST? Pre Leave every BST died so much each level that it was past discouraging, it made most party till they got leave or quit the job. If they partied they lost out on that valuable experience a Bst must learn at those low levels. But leave was totally worth it. Only once you get leave and get to solo on suicide goblins. And once your able to hit ToAU (fastest easiest experience to 75). Those would be the most efficient times of a BST career. Even those aren't sure bets. The easiest solo camps are usually taken. So taking the more difficult ones were an option I was always willing to take (I want to play on my time). It surely improved my skills once the camp/pop cycle were learned. However there are more variables then skill that determined success. Charm (stick or fail). Tame fails (stick or fail). Mobs "ambush" popping around a corner. Reraise was pretty much close to useless at the risky camps. Simply because mobs were so close a raise would aggro them instantly. Getting camped upon by another BST. High levels farming resulting in pets dying. You could be the most effecient BST. But it was just a matter of time till the cycle of the BST curse sets in.

Caesura wrote:
Even in the worst days of Dynamis, back when full wipes were common and 5k/hour was acceptable in a merit party, it would be a challenge to lose four hours of EXP. If it was happening consistently, something was very wrong.

My personal "lose a ton of EXP" story is the CoP airship fight. Man, my group spent hours and hours losing to that fight. We must have easily died enough times to lose four hours of EXP each, probably a fair bit more. But, man it felt good to finally beat that fight. I don't think any of us cared how much gil and EXP it cost us; it was so worth it to finally win. And, that happened once, in five years of playing. At no other time, in CoP, Dynamis, anywhere, did I ever come close to losing four hours of EXP in one session.


You make it sound so easy! Those are party examples... (sigh). As a solo BST main being able to even participate in anything like that was a dream. Especially as a "casual" ffxi player. My "endgame" was hitting 75 on BST and canceling my account.
____________________________
#36 Aug 23 2009 at 3:28 PM Rating: Default
**
456 posts
Quote:
The thing you seem to not understand is that you are also claiming to speak for the majority, but how long have you been around, and how long have I? I think I have a far better grasp of the average player and the existing fanbase than you. I see what not only the current XI players think, but I also saw what all the people who quit FFXI very early in its life cycle thought, nevermind the myriad other games that enter the equation. And no, there's no way I'd believe that you've been lurking all this time, because if you were you could not disagree with my statements conscientiously


I never spoken for the majority, when I say people I mean just that, people. I never said the majority of people think this or that, because it wouldn't be true because you don't know what the majority of people think. I have said people think this or people have never done that and that implies "people" I know or saw (of course). I didn't say the majority of the players never done this, but I did say that I have never seen it. Their is a big difference, you claim to speak for the majority of the playerbase (all the time), when in fact its just the majority of your circle of friends.

You say one thing and never dispute the fact that if what you said was true then manaburns, mnk burns, and melee burns would have never became popular. If people was so discouraged by the death penalty (as you say), then they would have never tried such a thing. These things would have never became the main way to level and same goes for a lot of boss strategies.

Quote:
Bullsh*t, the people in my end game shells are seasoned enough not to give a **** about dying anymore (save a couple whiny BLMs I know). We'll eat R1s if it will get us back in the fight faster, push our hate to the point where tanks have to struggle to keep up, and fight weakened if we think it will get mob X killed faster, then do a meritpo and get capped buffer again in no time.


I think your confusing the willingness to accept death, with not caring at all. I would always accept a r1 to get back into the fight, and make sure we didn't wipe or something. The fact that people went back and merited to get their buffer back mean they "cared" some bit. A person that doesn't "care" at all, wouldn't waste their time geing their buffer back, when they don't care if they die or if they delevel. The only reason to get your exp back or get a buffer at all, was to make sure you didn't delevel, which means your care about dying. When I say care, I don't mean you should be overly concerned but I do mean that it should matter (which mean you care). Care doesn't mean you go **** about it, it just means that you take notice and its matters, even if it just matters a little bit to you (like getting the exp back).

New players didn't lose as much exp as high level players. This leveled the playing field, and a new player dying usually meant a couple fights to get the exp back. I cared less on a low level character then I did on a high level character, because you only lost like 500 exp (if that, depending how new).
#37 Aug 23 2009 at 4:41 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,084 posts
I am the kind of player that plays new games on the hardest difficulty the first time I play them. So my own personal philosophy is that I need severe penalties and difficulty to enjoy a game. I understand that many casual players don't really understand the mindset.

I was talking to a casual gamer friend who was playing Dead Space on easy and kept on dying and instead of trying anything new or different in his strategies, and finding there were no cheats, he decided it was too hard for him and quit.

Naturally, this was a foreign and disturbing concept to me, to the point of irritation.

But really, there are two types of gamers: People who find pleasure in playing for challenge and the satisfaction that comes from overcoming hardships, and people who play for fun by turning on cheats and using godmode.

The latter I find completely dull, but hey, if people like it, let them do it.

However, in an MMO, where casuals and hardcore collide in an online environment and everyone must abide to a single set of universal rules, there needs to be a distinct balance of difficulty and penalties.

Would the Resident Evils or Silent Hills be nearly as atmospheric and nerve wracking if you had tons of ammo instead of punishing you for not conserving and rationing correctly?

Penalties are meant to instill a need to be careful, deliberate and cautious or there there is no tension in the game. And that destroys the game.

Kachi, this is simply a philosophical difference.

A good compromise between XI death penalties and WoW penalties would be ideal to appease both parties. (Preferably scaling in severity for new players to more experienced players who should know better.)


Edited, Aug 23rd 2009 6:02pm by Kirbster
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#38 Aug 23 2009 at 4:54 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,481 posts
Once again, ********* The exp loss doesn't deter us from doing things that have a high chance of us dying repetitively and sometimes pointlessly, thus we don't care about dying and it's not fulfilling what you yourself have claimed to be it's purpose. We care about our damage output though, which is why we merit to get back to 75+ after the fact (that and it's just cathartic to slaughter hundreds of flamingos).
hp wrote:
New players didn't lose as much exp as high level players. This leveled the playing field, and a new player dying usually meant a couple fights to get the exp back. I cared less on a low level character then I did on a high level character, because you only lost like 500 exp (if that, depending how new).
New players have a higher chance of dying, kill dramatically slower (up to several minutes vs 20s), don't get raises most of the time (also: R3 regains everything but 240exp@68+, players can only get r1 effect under 50, so you loose more exp than a 75 w/ r3 33-50), w/o raise new players often have to HP/run back, don't have as much money for food, and (if solo) get less exp per kill. The death penalty is much worse for them whether you "care less" or not.
____________________________
Quote:
I don't believe in good guys versus bad guys anymore… I only see a plethora of states acting in self interest… with varying ethics and moral standards of course, but self-interest nonetheless
Winston Churchill wrote:
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things
#39 Aug 23 2009 at 8:46 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
I am the kind of player that plays new games on the hardest difficulty the first time I play them. So my own personal philosophy is that I need severe penalties and difficulty to enjoy a game. I understand that many casual players don't really understand the mindset.


I do that too, but punishment=!challenge. What if a friend comes in the room and punches you in the face if you die? Does that make the game more challenging, or just more frustrating? The benefit of the challenge from playing on hard mode is that the GAME IS ACTUALLY HARDER, and not the fact that if you die, you lose time and progress. But if you seriously just want to punish yourself, slam your balls in the door every time you do something wrong. It will make hard mode seem like ultimate ******* ***** mode.

Quote:
I was talking to a casual gamer friend who was playing Dead Space on easy and kept on dying and instead of trying anything new or different in his strategies, and finding there were no cheats, he decided it was too hard for him and quit.

Naturally, this was a foreign and disturbing concept to me, to the point of irritation.


I confess I don't really understand this mentality either, but this is not the de facto casual player approach to gaming. I would imagine that there were other factors that contributed to his quitting.

Quote:
But really, there are two types of gamers: People who find pleasure in playing for challenge and the satisfaction that comes from overcoming hardships, and people who play for fun by turning on cheats and using godmode.

The latter I find completely dull, but hey, if people like it, let them do it.


If you're trying to correlate this bifurcation to games with harsh penalties and games without them, then no. But this goes back to your misconception that punishment=! challenge.
Quote:

Would the Resident Evils or Silent Hills be nearly as atmospheric and nerve wracking if you had tons of ammo instead of punishing you for not conserving and rationing correctly?


That's not a punishment or a penalty. It's a limitation. Yes, they are different in ways that are not merely semantic.
Quote:

Penalties are meant to instill a need to be careful, deliberate and cautious or there there is no tension in the game. And that destroys the game.


That's a popular theory that is demonstrably wrong in many games where players can continually attempt difficult battles consecutively, and still must determine a winning strategy to be victorious.

The purpose of penalties is to stretch out the game content cheaply and easily.

Quote:
Kachi, this is simply a philosophical difference.


I really don't think it is. A matter of differing tastes is not a philosophical difference, anymore than it would be a philosophical difference if I liked my *** to be vigorous yet enjoyable, and you liked it to be tantric and painful. Which seems like an apt analogy.

I'm no stranger to this kind of masochism coming from gamers. It seems to go hand and hand with the crowd that has problems with compulsion (which used to include yours truly). I get it, but I don't embrace it.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#40 Aug 23 2009 at 9:18 PM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
Penalties don't make something more difficult, but they raise the stakes of your actions, and as a result, tension.

But it's obvious anything I try to say you'll throw back at me with pompous accusations of masochism so I'm not going to bother.

Edited, Aug 23rd 2009 10:20pm by Kirbster
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#41 Aug 23 2009 at 9:27 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
I think I've responded to your points with valid criticisms, so I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to paint me as some unreasonable thickhead.

Quote:
Penalties don't make something more difficult, but they raise the stakes of your actions, and as a result, the tension.


True, but they raise the tension through frustration rather than excitement and anticipation. I don't think I need to say which I deem favorable and which I deem masochistic. Not because I'm the king of deeming things, but because I own a dictionary. I mean, are rollercoasters more fun the longer you have to wait in line? Does the tension it builds make the experience more rewarding and enjoyable? And on the off chance that you really do think so (and yet still resent being accused of masochism), for how many people do you really think that's the case?

And perhaps its worth noting that I'm not hurling around the term ********* as an insult. I'm merely pointing out that the mindset is by far in the minority, and that these are not psychological principles that apply or appeal to the average consumer.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#42 Aug 23 2009 at 9:32 PM Rating: Good
***
2,084 posts
I'm aware of such, which is why I mentioned at the conclusion of my original post:
Quote:

A good compromise between XI death penalties and WoW penalties would be ideal to appease both parties. (Preferably scaling in severity for new players to more experienced players who should know better.)


I don't understand, is this such a terrible thing?

I'm more than aware that penalties will inevitably be used to lengthen playtime in MMOs, but they have other uses as well...

Edited, Aug 23rd 2009 10:33pm by Kirbster
____________________________
What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?
#43 Aug 23 2009 at 9:41 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
No, it's not a terrible thing, and I almost replied to that, but then deleted my response to that section.

What I was going to say was that while it seems like a perfectly reasonable compromise, a compromise would almost definitely be less successful than simply foregoing your interests in the matter altogether. This is a linear issue, not a binary one, so the extent to which you compromise and attempt to placate one group of people will proportionately displease another group of people. Since your group is notably smaller, well, that's the brutal truth of it. Not to mention that there's the issue of representation-- more games offer this mechanic despite the lower demand. So it's kind of easy to just tell you to go play another game for your demographic so that the new game can fulfill the needs of the market.

Though for what it's worth, I think scaling penalties is a good suggestion regardless, if there are to be penalties at all.

And I said this in the other thread as well, but this is not a huge sticking issue for me personally. I've been fascinated with game design for well over a decade and these are not my whimsical musings on personal issues, but a matter of advocacy for better game design practices at most, and an entertaining discussion at least.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#44 Aug 26 2009 at 11:35 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
180 posts
There is something called risk/reward balance. If there is no risk, the payoff is less rewarding.

I wish everyone could have played EQ at release as their first MMO instead of WoW. Then they'd see that the death penalty in FFXI was extremely light in comparison. Talk about 2-3 hour long corpse runs plus the loss of 2-3 hours more of exp and the chance of losing all your gear and you've got a severe death penalty. I got frustrated when I died in EQ yes, but it happened rarely and the excitment level of being deep in a dungeon was increased tenfold by the added risk.

FFXI never felt as exciting. I rarely died, but when I did at lower levels I always had a homepoint set nearby and was back in the battle within a few minutes. I've played FFXI since release and never lost four hours worth of experience at a time. People must be really exaggerating this point to make the penalty appear worse than it really is. Seriously... five minutes of sickness is too much? Go grab a drink and play smarter next time. Chances are you'll have already earned the exp back by the time the sickness wears off. FFXI barely had a penalty at all.

Dumb down the penalty even more, or remove it altogether, and the game becomes extremely dull over time.
#45 Aug 27 2009 at 7:53 AM Rating: Decent
45 posts
I think part of the problem is that it sounds like people are talking from two different camps. If a person has a reliable group they can play with, it takes less than a half hour to fully recover from a death, sure. (Even without a raise.)

However... Not all of us were so lucky. I joined the game when my friends were in the L50 area, and far before level syncing. So for me, I was trying to play catch-up so I could play with friends, and spent a lot of time with random whoever's-playing groups.

One of the last experiences I had before letting my account dwindle and finally cancelling was an attempted experience party. (The story I'm about to tell had become more and more common during my game play.)

I had the whole evening free. "Great," I thought, "I can finally get that next level so I can wear my next piece of gear!"

Start looking for a group.

Keep looking for a group.

"Hi, want to party?"

No answer.

"Want to party?"

"No."

(Several hours of this pass.)

Finally, I have a group! We run out to ruins (somewhere - it's been a long time) and start fighting... goblins, I think.

Win a fight, win another fight, tank fails and party wipes.

We all run back out, get together, eat our food, buff up. Pull...

...and wipe.

Run out again, get together. And wipe again.

I de-level, along with one other person who loses some gear. All of a sudden, the party disbands, and I find myself alone in the middle of the ruins.

I wasted about 5 hours, only 1.5 of which was in the party, and I gained -0.5 levels.

The problem was, this was pretty common for me. I knew my role, but with all my friends 20 levels above me, I had to rely on unknown persons, and it was common to get one in every party or two that would do something like pull hate, mistime a cast, or just plain play poorly, and in a party-centric game like FFXI, it was catastrophic. The problem was, that person was not the only one to suffer - the whole party did.

And therein lay the problem I experienced. Levelling was a major endeavour, and I was fortunate to get one level from 10 hours of playtime. (Poor luck, I know, but that's what I went through.) And when the actions of one person can penalize the whole party, you're being punished for things outside of your control.

Psychologically, a punishment does two things: deters you from repeating the incurring action, and causes you to resent the punisher. The more often it happens, the more the focus switches to the latter. The more this happened to me, the less I felt the death was my fault, and the more I blamed the system that forced me into these situations.

There's a lot to be said for positive reinforcements rather than negative. Say you don't suffer experience loss, but normal experience gain is slow. But every battle you win without dying, you get more experience from, and when you die, it resets back to the base. At that point, you want to stay alive (because you get greater and greater rewards) but if you die, your first thought is to go fight more (without dying) so you can get back to the good rewards.

Take a look sometimes (if it interests you) at the studies comparing positive vs. negative reinforcement. It turns out that negative works far faster in the short term, but loses some of its impact each time it's used. Positive is slower at first, but continues to work far longer, and much smaller increments are needed to keep the impact.

I did quit FFXI - after I spent two months to gain two levels. The cost in time was so high that I no longer felt it was worth it, particularly since I was unable to reach the point to spend time with my friends and actually experience the enjoyable parts of the game.

My hope is that FFXIV will consider this, keep punishments to a bare minimum, and offer a game that has a full-spectrum of community.
____________________________
d'Jang'ai'alarion
#46 Aug 27 2009 at 11:39 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,917 posts
Quote:
Dumb down the penalty even more, or remove it altogether, and the game becomes extremely dull over time.


Really? Is the threat to your xp pot what gets you excited?

To me the xp penalty was only adding insult to injury. The reason I don't like to die is the 5 minutes wasted waiting to have sickness wear off. That can be enough to mean the difference in winning or losing a battle. And in the end, that is what excites me. The struggle to win a tight battle in the time frame alotted. The xp loss is only an annoyance and never has been a driving force for whether I worry about dying or not. I try not to die because a weakened character is a far less effectual character.

The xp penalty just gives people needless time sinks. There is enough content in FFXI that it's high time SE got rid of some of these stupid time sinks. They are improving things with more easily available transport, FoV and Campaign for quick xp sessions, etc. But de-levelling has got to go.
____________________________
Mirabelle
Race: Mithra
Server: Ifrit
75COR/75RDM/75RNG/45THF/37BLM/38WHM/37NIN/37DRK/41BLU/37DNC/37SAM/37WAR/37SCH
#47 Aug 27 2009 at 2:41 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
180 posts
Dartagnann wrote:
Quote:
Dumb down the penalty even more, or remove it altogether, and the game becomes extremely dull over time.


Really? Is the threat to your xp pot what gets you excited?

To me the xp penalty was only adding insult to injury. The reason I don't like to die is the 5 minutes wasted waiting to have sickness wear off. That can be enough to mean the difference in winning or losing a battle. And in the end, that is what excites me. The struggle to win a tight battle in the time frame alotted. The xp loss is only an annoyance and never has been a driving force for whether I worry about dying or not. I try not to die because a weakened character is a far less effectual character.

The xp penalty just gives people needless time sinks. There is enough content in FFXI that it's high time SE got rid of some of these stupid time sinks. They are improving things with more easily available transport, FoV and Campaign for quick xp sessions, etc. But de-levelling has got to go.


You have to have sufficient risk to make the payoff rewarding. You're telling me that if you were playing an MMO where the penalty for death was character deletion, you wouldn't be on the edge of your seat every time you played? That example is extreme, but the point should be obvious to anyone. Why do you think people go bungee jumping or skydying? It's the thrill of cheating death that gets their adrenaline pumping.

The death penalty is not an enforced time sink. It's a self imposed penalty for playing foolishly. With a little luck and a lot of skill, there's a chance you could play through the entire game and never die at all. It's intended to increase the risk involved with the gain of higher rewards. If there is no risk involved, the game becomes boring. If you have nothing to lose, what fun is there in winning? If anything the penalty in FFXI was too weak to produce the feeling I'm trying to describe because as you said yourself, it was merely an annoyance. If you're coming from other big exp bonus/no risk MMOs to FFXI, then you probably have no idea what I'm talking about. The penalty for death in FFXI wasn't even enough of a risk to consider for you when choosing the difficulty of your fights, so as far as I'm concerned, complaining about it really amounts to whining about nothing.
#48 Aug 27 2009 at 2:58 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,481 posts
Quote:
You're telling me that if you were playing an MMO where the penalty for death was character deletion, you wouldn't be on the edge of your seat every time you played?
I would never play that game in the first place, neither would most sane, non-masochistic people, which was what I already brought up earlier, but you seem to have missed it.
Quote:
the point should be obvious to anyone.
I think so too, but I don't think it's the one you're going for.

Edited, Aug 27th 2009 7:00pm by shintasama
____________________________
Quote:
I don't believe in good guys versus bad guys anymore… I only see a plethora of states acting in self interest… with varying ethics and moral standards of course, but self-interest nonetheless
Winston Churchill wrote:
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things
#49 Aug 27 2009 at 2:59 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
180 posts
homeschoolzam wrote:

...

There's a lot to be said for positive reinforcements rather than negative. Say you don't suffer experience loss, but normal experience gain is slow. But every battle you win without dying, you get more experience from, and when you die, it resets back to the base. At that point, you want to stay alive (because you get greater and greater rewards) but if you die, your first thought is to go fight more (without dying) so you can get back to the good rewards.

...


I think a lot of the frustration you experienced was more to do with the flawed party system than with the death penalty itself. In a game where you didn't have to frequently wait five hours for a party, that exp penalty for dying wouldn't have stung nearly as bad. I played almost exclusively in pick up parties with random people, and while there were times when I died due to someone elses mistake, those situations weren't the norm. They never drove me to the point of resenting the game, rather I simply added those poor players to my black list and made sure to never play with them again.

Some games have tried the positive reinforcement route with debt systems, where when you die part of future experience is used to pay off your debt. While it works for the most part, it breaks down once players get to the max level. At that point they only care about not losing experience and a debt system offers no penalty at all. It also can leave a player with so much debt that they no longer see the point of continuing to play. At least with a exp loss system I know every time I log on that the mistakes of previous play sessions will not continue to loom over me.

I'd accept either system though, as long as there is some sort of risk involved.
#50 Aug 27 2009 at 3:10 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
180 posts
shintasama wrote:
Quote:
You're telling me that if you were playing an MMO where the penalty for death was character deletion, you wouldn't be on the edge of your seat every time you played?
I would never play that game in the first place, which was what I already brought up earlier.
Quote:
the point should be obvious to anyone.
I think so too, but I don't think it's the one you're going for.


Like I said before, you obviously have no idea what I'm talking about. You completely ignored my point. Obviously you would never play a game with that extreme of a death penalty, I never said you would. However, there is a balance between the two where the benefit gained from the increased tension outweights the deterrent to continue playing the game. You're advocating the other extreme end of the spectrum and I wouldn't want to play game either.
#51 Aug 27 2009 at 3:18 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,481 posts
Calispel wrote:
shintasama wrote:
Quote:
You're telling me that if you were playing an MMO where the penalty for death was character deletion, you wouldn't be on the edge of your seat every time you played?
I would never play that game in the first place, which was what I already brought up earlier.
Quote:
the point should be obvious to anyone.
I think so too, but I don't think it's the one you're going for.


Like I said before, you obviously have no idea what I'm talking about. You completely ignored my point. Obviously you would never play a game with that extreme of a death penalty, I never said you would. However, there is a balance between the two where the benefit gained from the increased tension outweights the deterrent to continue playing the game. You're advocating the other extreme end of the spectrum and I wouldn't want to play game either.
I'm saying my/your/kachi/hocus/pikko/muteki/whoever's definition of what is "appropriate" isn't going to be the same, so SE should go with whatever will keep the most players happy, and that more players will quit if the penalty is extreme than non-existent. You can always flog yourself for dying if being punished gives you "extra excitement".

Edited, Aug 27th 2009 7:21pm by shintasama
____________________________
Quote:
I don't believe in good guys versus bad guys anymore… I only see a plethora of states acting in self interest… with varying ethics and moral standards of course, but self-interest nonetheless
Winston Churchill wrote:
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things
« Previous 1 2
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 25 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (25)