+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 146
Like Tree107Likes

Thread: Casual and Proud

  1. #106
    Ascendant Noaani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arus2001 View Post
    Humor me, then, with an insight. Assuming someone were to start fresh today in HK, how long would it take them to go 11/11 having 2-3 nights a week at their disposal and a guild that's 100% successful despite maybe the occasional wipe?

    Part of my measurement of determining casual and hardcore lies in time requirements. If the answer to the above winds up being something more than two months, it is not casual content despite it maybe taking 2-3 hours per attempt with organization handled by another individual or three.
    You don't understand the mentality I raiders very well, casual or hardcore.

    If a player new to HK joins a guild clearing it, assuming they have the best gear available to them and they know how to play (even if they dont know encounter specifics) there is no reason for them to not be a part of that guilds next full clearing of the zone. Instead of taking several months, it could well only take several hours.

    The thing you are failing to grasp about raiding though, unlike dungeons, rifts or zone events, each individual boss encounter is its own challenge. Killing each individual encounter is a goal. Starting a zone for the first time with the only goal being to clear it is not really that different to starting a game fresh with the only goal being to clear the end game group content.

    While both are definatley worthy goals, both also have many sub-sets of goals that need to be tackled first. Basically, your mistake here is not separating how players view single group content and raid content.

    As for your complaint about no HK quality loot available with ISS, the answer is simple: Trion want the casual raids - for whom they just made clearing HK possible - to feel like there is still a reason to run it. If equal quality gear were available via ISS, those casual raiders would have no reason to run the newly nerfed HK to get their gear.

    Fear not though, in 1.9 or 1.10 you can be confidant that Trion will indeed add better gear for ISS. By this time, top end raiders will either be working on the end of ID, or will have it cleared, and casual raiders will be realizing that the first few mobs of ID are attainable. At this point, top end raiders will be in mostly T3 raid loot, casual raiders will be in mostly T2 raid loot and starting to earn T3, and so Trion will add loot equivalent to T2 raid loot for ISS, so as to keep the vast majority of players within a very small range of gear quality.

    Essentially, half way through a full development cycle (raid zone > solo content > small raid zone > group content > solo content > back to he start), every level 50 character played by someone that cares should have gear equivalent to T2 or T3 raid loot.

    Edit: time spent should never be used as a determining factor o casual/hardcore. I've seen casual players spend hours try into get in to opposing cities, or trying to climb things because they are there.
    Last edited by Noaani; 04-14-2012 at 07:00 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Debase View Post
    If the only target audience for Rift is disenfranchised WoW players, its doomed imo.

  2. #107
    Rift Disciple MatipzieuKyA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noaani View Post
    Arus, you are getting casual/hardcore and raider/non-raider mixed up.

    In a true casual vs hardcore discussion, raiding should never even be bought up, as the bulk of people that raid in an MMO are indeed casual. In fact, it is these casual raiders that push the need for new top end raid content. The top end raid content that Trion implement today is tomorrows casual raid content.

    Now, if you want to have a discussion between raiders and non-raiders, do so without using the terms casual and hardcore. If you want to have a conversation between casual and hardcore, do so without using the terms raider or non-raider (or soloer). However, if you wish to mix these terms up to suit your whim, you need to account for the hardcore raider, the casual raider, the hardcore non-raider and the casual non-raider.
    It's good to see more folks challenging the faux and polarizing debate of "casual versus hardcore." Both of these terms are so vague, general, and grossly underspecified yet emotionally charged that they easily result in the need for the poor mods to step in and start scrubbing, the tone of the conversation to needlessly shift from useful and constructive to destructive and divisive, with the final result that real problems and deficiencies go unidentified, unresolved, and no progress occurs for anyone.

    I'd like to offer a handful of observations, perspectives, and suggestions that I think can make a contribution towards actually identifying real problems and resolving them. I'm coming at this from the perspective of a longtime gamer and raider (back from before the days of instancing) that believes in Trion, Rift, and Hartsman's vision. I'm fiercely concerned that there has been a gross failure of marketing segmentation from Trion's marketing department, leading to an equally gross series of business failures to acknowledge and respond to this segment.

    Background reading on my comments (recent threads):
    Problems with current Rift endgame
    Something that can be done about it (detailed suggestions)
    What Status Quo looks like for many real players (worth reading through, some good discussion about viability of "PUG" raiding and what it does and doesn't look like in real life)

    Towards a more complete, nuanced, and useful understanding of the flawed "Casual v Hardcore" model: 4-5 key indicators

    A model that I've proposed over several threads recently offers a better way to examine this issue. My guildmates and I have been scratching our head over "casual v hardcore" for years, since we don't neatly fit into either bucket, yet at the same time fit into both. Basically, we're gaming proof that it's a broken distinction, and were for years before it was first employed in That Other Game.

    The most important part of the following 4-5 key indicators is that each one is completely independent of one another. Each are linear gradiants and should be treated not as binary "yes/no" but as scales of people that fall along continual lines, hence my usage of the term "axis."

    Axis 1: Skill
    Skill does and very much should matter. Skill should be required for accomplishment, and rewarded. Without skill, there should be no accomplishment and no reward. Skill is something based on a combination of individual latent ability and effort. Different players have different degrees of skill. This is true in game and in life. Skill is something that everyone can work on improving through effort. For example, by studying, researching, practicing and mastering strong specs, rotations, combinations, strategies, etc. Different players have different levels of skill. This is a DESCRIPTIVE statement of FACT, not a moral judgment about those players. It's really frustrating to take something that should be descriptive and assigning moral and judgment attributes to it. Two people make two different salaries. Maybe they're big, maybe they're small. Does this mean that one person is "better" or the other person is "worse" than the other? Hell no. They're both people, damnit, just like two players. Some people can one-shot the squid with 95-99% probability. Some people can one-shot the squid with 100% probability. Some people can kill Greenscale with 50% probability. Some people can solo level 50 Minor rifts with 50% probability. Some people wipe in the chronicles. Okay, that's descriptive. Judgement is not helpful. You are you. I am me. Awesome!

    Axis 2: Ambition
    This is the key distinction that I've seen actively used, discussed, and never directly addressed. Some folks want a challenge. Some folks don't. Some folks crave insanely hardcore challenges like food. Some folks would rather drink a smashed bottle of 16M HCl, including the glass shards. Different people have different interests. This should be treated descriptively, devoid of judgement. Nobody's interests are threatening anyone else.

    Axis 3: Schedule Flexibility
    Some people have lives that are well planned in advance. Some people don't. This is a major distinction that I've seen lost on "casual versus hardcore" threads for years even after the discussion has turned to separating schedule and skill.

    I'd like to illustrate this one, and explore what it means.

    Let's take three players, John, Becky, and Bob.

    John has 13 hours of playtime available per week, but his personal schedule is extremely inflexible, so he has no idea when those 13hours might land in a given day. Let's say he only knows whether or not the next hour will be available to him in a given day, and that this can vary. His schedule is inflexible on a daily level, to say nothing about the weekly level. Now, let's say that John is also scary good. John kicks *** along the skill and ambition axes. When you see John spawn into your warfront, that takes you to your happy place. John loves the 5-man dungeon game and outdoor invasions because they break his playtime up into nice manageable 1-hour chunks. There's no way that John feels like he can go on deep dungeon excursions on a regular basis because they're too long. (*As a footnote, I'd like to mention that I'm personally frustrated by content that's getting shorter, and I miss the old days of long progressions, but it's more important to me to identify all of these axes and help everyone out than it is to advance my personal agenda.)

    Let's say that Becky has 20 hours of playtime available per week. Her PA exp is doing great. The problem is that she works a job where she could get three days off--or nine days on--on literally 30 seconds' notice. Becky's schedule at a day-to-week level varies. Becky took one look at raid guilds that have set raiding schedules that never vary from week to week and threw up her hands. Becky loves raiding, and generally has 4-5 hours of playtime available in nice big chunks. For Becky, joining long PUG raids is great, because when they start and when she wants to play line up, and she can just pounce on them.

    Now let's take a look at Bob. Bob has 8 hours of play time total available per week, but he knows exactly when that playtime is day to day and week to week. Joining an HK raid guild is no harder for Bob than years ago when he was still in university and setting up his class schedule.

    The point of this story is that schedule flexibility is a complex gradiant--and it has NOTHING to do with total playtime available.

    Axis 4: Total Playtime Available
    This is the traditional way that "casual" has been considered; there's also an assumption that it correlates to skill, ambition, and schedule flexibility. This isn't a guarantee.

    John has 13 hours of play time/week.
    Becky has 20 hours of play time/week.
    Bob has 8 horus of play time/week.

    Nassid's a college student working part-time during the summer. Let's say he has 30-40 hours per week, depending on how much he likes sleeping, and whether or not he has a significant other.

    Elisabetta's a single working mother. Let's say she has 4 hours a week and really values those four hours. She loves outdoor invasions and rifts because she can come and go on a moment's notice (Geronimo just woke up and made a mess that she needs to be able to go deal with without causing any problems.) She needs extremely high flexibility in her schedule.

    Juan's a retired grandfather and the top healer in his guild. He's got 40 hours per week and by goodness he's legendary in raids and WFs on his server. Did I mention it's a PVP server? (His wife's the MT. She has 45 because she doesn't like some of his favorite TV programs.)

    Adam's another retired grandfather. He has 50 hours per week of playtime, and it's actually even more flexible than Juan and his wife's playtime, but he's not interested in being extremely powerful the way Juan and his wife are. He's quite happy running his small crafting empire.

    (Optional) Axis 5: Guild Loyalty & Size
    One of the correlations that I've seen implicitly and explicitly drawn over the years is between "hardcore" and "casual" guilds, and an implication that "hardcores" can't come from small guilds, or that players in large guilds approach by definition "hardcore."

    Does the size guild that a player is in cause that player to be higher or lower skilled, have greater or less schedule flexibility and total playtime available? Causality is far more likely to run in the other direction, explaining the percieved correlation. Given the independent nature of the above four variables, however, this is still likely to cause problems.

    You can have high skill, high ambition players in both large guilds and small. This has been true in MMOs across time. Old school DAoC players probably have vivid memories of "Gank Squads" and "SWAT team" guilds. These were incredibly small, tight-knit guilds of people who were scary. My guild is one of them, though we preferred doing so by forming the core group of public raiding back on Gaheris.

    There are also plenty of large guilds that have high skill, high ambition players. Plenty of big names all over these boards, not hard to find these.

    The point is that players come in all shapes and sizes. Guilds come in all shapes and sizes.

    It is flawed and erroneous to conclude that because a player is in a small guild, this is because they are not interested in endgame or raiding.

    Many players come from a time when guilds mattered and were valued primarily as communities and for social reasons. My guildmates and I formed our guild not in Rift, not in EQ2, not in WAR, not in LOTRO, not in DAoC, but in Tribes. (We played Renegades. Kudos if you even know what that is.) One of the things we loved about DAoC was that the guild was a crucial component of guilds, culture, and community on the servers, but they were not restrictive. One of the major complaints I've seen with regards to this issue over the years has been that in loot-centric, instanced games, raid structures encourage guild-hopping and other destructive within-guild behaviors that destroy communities both within guilds and between them. Certainly these problems existed before the days of instanced raiding, but instanced raiding applied major additional pressure.

    Parting thoughts:

    I've tried in the above analysis to hit the major 4+1 axes that I see go into "casual versus hardcore." The problem with "casual versus hardcore" is that it fails to understand, explain, and segment a number of different players.

    Any marketing segmentation employed by Trion that attempts to narrowly describe their player base by "Casual" and "Hardcore" is seriously flawed. This inaccurate oversimplification desperately needs to be reconsidered in the light of the problems expressed on this thread. This inaccurate marketing segmentation exercise may be leading to development strategies that are missing major opportunities to capture and cement larger MMO market share. This inaccurate market segmentation may also be costing Trion market share as players whose needs and interests are not being met are desperately searching for alternatives.

    "Casual versus hardcore" fails to explain a variety of players who may be high skill, high ambition, but low flexibility and low total playtime. Are these players hardcore? Watch them play, hell yes they are. But they're also casual in terms of playtime. So are they casual or hardcore?

    "Casual versus hardcore" fails to explain players who are high skill, high flexibility, high total playtime, but low ambition. Let's say Tristan walks out into the WFs or open world PVP once in a while, and leaves a trail of mutilated corpses behind him when he does. The guy is absolutely wicked. He's on all the time. But he doesn't really spend a lot of time either in the WFs or raiding. He's happy doing his thing.

    "Casual versus hardcore" fails to explain players who may be high skill, high ambition, moderate flexibility and low total playtime but who may be dedicated members of small guilds, who have never stepped into the 20-man raid instances and are now on the boards at a time when ID is going around saying that they have no meaningful PvE endgame.

    * * *

    I'm hoping that this framework, from "casual versus hardcore" to "skill, ambition, flexibility, total playtime (+guild loyalty & size)" will help allow a more useful, productive, and cordial discussion.

    I get the sense that a lot of people arguing "casual versus hardcore" are doing so by basically confusing these axes and drawing different conclusions that are internally consistent given their perspectives, preventing understanding and reconciliation.

    Common examples of this flawed reasoning:

    "I am high skill and high ambition. You are low skill and low ambition. Therefore, I am hardcore, and you are casual."

    "You are low schedule flexibility and low total playtime. Therefore, regardless of your skill or ambition, you are casual. Because I have greater schedule flexibility and more total playtime, I am hardcore."

    "People with low schedule flexibility and low total playtime are by definition all low ambition and low skill."

    "People with high skill and high ambition all by definition have high schedule flexibility and high total playtime."

    Thanks for reading.
    Last edited by MatipzieuKyA; 04-14-2012 at 07:38 PM.

  3. #108
    General of Telara arus2001's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    957

    Default

    I'll just have to politely protest on the assumption of what you believe I know about large group mechanics. Rift may not be my personal specialty, as past experiences in other games are partially why I'm avoiding it now, but at the very least I have been involved in 36-man affairs as a frequent head of our specific 18-man alliance through what may be considered a mix of the healer and support role here. It wasn't always fun to do. It was grossly under-appreciated. And that's not even touching no-drops or getting drops nobody needed.

    Meanwhile, just because someone wastes their time doing something that amuses them doesn't mean using time as a gauge is invalid in an MMO. Some games are literally pay-per-hour as opposed to unlimited monthly. Time is very much a dev concern for, at the very least, how long they can ideally keep the masses occupied until they can churn out new content. Time, when paired with raid cooldowns, puts a minimum number of weeks, days, or hours on how quickly someone can get a specific piece of gear. This can be problematic when people who play way too much are setting the standard for acquisition if time restrictions are removed. It goes well beyond simple patience with the proposition of needing months of time to accomplish something in a game. Some people will see that and simply choose not to bother, and I can't blame them for that choice.

    Now, you may think gating people is a good system and the cyclical progression you implied is good for the community, but I am again going to have to disagree. The following will probably elicit indifference, but with my month lapsing tomorrow, today's conversation has led me not to renew. When I have nothing to look forward to and people basically saying to suck it up indefinitely in a few more words, it highlights my points of discontent. Even in not playing with hardcore raiders they still manage to affect my play and progress through their demands of exclusivity. For all the hubbub about MMOs being multiplayer, it puzzles me why methods of exclusion are favored over inclusion.

    Apologies if I can't reply further due to access revocations, but I don't think there's much more I can say about all of this without getting repetitive. Perhaps being truer to the original topic, I like being a casual player. I also wish to protect their means to remain as such. For all the hundreds of thousands of people who play this game, many of us will never cross paths. A prior poster wondered about the meaning of the phrase, "It's just a game." When it comes to Rift, I disagree. MMOs are not just a game. They're a social environment. They can make us laugh, cry, get angry, feel sad, proud, or even bored. They've brought people together in marriage. They've lead people to commit real life crimes. If your definition of a game is simply distraction, then sure, it flips the bill. That's selling the experience awfully short, though, and I hate the thought of people missing out on that potential just because they can't play as much.

  4. #109
    Champion of Telara Leif's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,219

    Default

    I'm not sure there's really anything to be proud of, on the sole basis of casual/hardcore and the spectrum between. Be proud of your accomplishments, I suppose, but when people rail against you on the basis of being "casual", it's probably synonymous with "not very skilled" rather than "doesn't play a lot". Even still, there are plenty of self proclaimed "hardcores" who aren't very good at all, as much as they would like to think otherwise.

  5. #110
    Rift Disciple MatipzieuKyA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    116

    Default

    P.S. I had a request to draw on additional distinction that I think is relevant on this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Noaani View Post
    You don't understand the mentality I raiders very well, casual or hardcore.

    If a player new to HK joins a guild clearing it, assuming they have the best gear available to them and they know how to play (even if they dont know encounter specifics) there is no reason for them to not be a part of that guilds next full clearing of the zone. Instead of taking several months, it could well only take several hours.

    The thing you are failing to grasp about raiding though, unlike dungeons, rifts or zone events, each individual boss encounter is its own challenge. Killing each individual encounter is a goal. Starting a zone for the first time with the only goal being to clear it is not really that different to starting a game fresh with the only goal being to clear the end game group content.

    While both are definatley worthy goals, both also have many sub-sets of goals that need to be tackled first. Basically, your mistake here is not separating how players view single group content and raid content.

    As for your complaint about no HK quality loot available with ISS, the answer is simple: Trion want the casual raids - for whom they just made clearing HK possible - to feel like there is still a reason to run it. If equal quality gear were available via ISS, those casual raiders would have no reason to run the newly nerfed HK to get their gear.

    Fear not though, in 1.9 or 1.10 you can be confidant that Trion will indeed add better gear for ISS. By this time, top end raiders will either be working on the end of ID, or will have it cleared, and casual raiders will be realizing that the first few mobs of ID are attainable. At this point, top end raiders will be in mostly T3 raid loot, casual raiders will be in mostly T2 raid loot and starting to earn T3, and so Trion will add loot equivalent to T2 raid loot for ISS, so as to keep the vast majority of players within a very small range of gear quality.

    Essentially, half way through a full development cycle (raid zone > solo content > small raid zone > group content > solo content > back to he start), every level 50 character played by someone that cares should have gear equivalent to T2 or T3 raid loot.

    Edit: time spent should never be used as a determining factor o casual/hardcore. I've seen casual players spend hours try into get in to opposing cities, or trying to climb things because they are there.
    Firstoff, as I mentioned below, thanks for drawing a distinciton between (skill and ambition) and (schedule flexibility and playtime). This is a big help.

    That said, I'd like to draw some additional helpful distinctions between player types.

    I would strongly argue that interest in participating in the instanced raid playstyle is its own separate variable independent of skill and ambition.

    There are a number of players who are high skill and high ambition that are interested in pursuing progression and challenges outside of the instanced raid environment. Many players have been calling for "RvE" or ways of putting additional challenge into outdoor content.

    Interest in participating in the post-2003 instanced raid game playstyle is also independent of skill and ambition.

    Skill and the ability to overcome hard obstacles should be the determining factor of accomplishment, achievement, advancement, and rewards, and no other variable.

    I've argued and proposed (see second link in my sig) that the degree of challenge present in open world today is grossly insufficient, if present at all. Right now, it appears that there is no PvE challenge to be found outside of instanced raiding that Trion is supporting as serious endgame.

    There are absolutely zero actual, physical, mathematical, technological, or valid structural reasons why the only place where meaningful challenge, meaningful progression, and meaningful PvE endgame can exist are within instanced raids. (See second link in my sig.)

    There are a large number of players who love this style of endgame. Awesome. Trion is the best in the business at producing instanced raid endgame. This should be supported, and continued uninterrupted. But it should not be the only form of endgame available. Skill can be expressed both within raid instances and without. Currently, the problem is that it does not appear that skill, meaningful progression, and serious PvE endgame exists outside of raid instances because no other medium is currently supported.

    (Many of us remember open-world, public raiding being quite challenging. The major pathology of that was exclusion and competition, particularly of loot. Instancing was one way of resolving this. Rift's outdoor system, by combining tear availability, lures, and the "rift loot" system, provides a solution to these pathologies that is compatible with open-world raiding. In other words, Rift has the perfect structural setup for RvE.)

    One way of addressing the meta-problem of raid encounter difficulty being reduced over time may be because it's not raiders who are trying to get into the content, but PvE'rs who want to progress who have no way of doing so outside of the raid instances, which means there might be a better, win-win way of resolving the issue at a meta level, rather than trying to get both a circle (bleeding-edge raiders) and a square (folks who want PvE progression but who may not necessarily be raiders) into the same hole.

  6. #111
    Rift Disciple MatipzieuKyA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    116

    Default

    ***Note to previous post:

    My proposal (see sig, second link) and thinking here is for there two be two separate progressions (outdoor and instanced PvE) separated by stat and gear boundaries as strong as that between PvE and PVP, that way nobody's progression is contaminated/threatened, and there's something for everyone. (Preferred endgame then becomes a choice, and nobody's forced into doing something they'd rather not, making the experience better for everyone.)

  7. #112
    Prophet of Telara Goodberry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,082

    Default

    Maybe I am a hardcore player who doesn't raid (here - I raided in WoW).

    Point is, raiding is where the game stops being fun for me and becomes a chore.

    I confess: like to feel powerful and dangerous in the game. Love to solo big elites, wreck everything I find in the chronicles, or devastate dungeons in a small group of 5.

    Raids, on the contrary, usually make me feel like a bug ready to be squashed. Everything that hits me kills me. No good. Find far less stressful to do Warfronts, ever at my meager Rank 13. Get killed a lot of times, but kill too, and often win.

  8. #113
    Rift Disciple MatipzieuKyA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Goodberry View Post
    Maybe I am a hardcore player who doesn't raid (here - I raided in WoW).

    Point is, raiding is where the game stops being fun for me and becomes a chore.

    I confess: like to feel powerful and dangerous in the game. Love to solo big elites, wreck everything I find in the chronicles, or devastate dungeons in a small group of 5.

    Raids, on the contrary, usually make me feel like a bug ready to be squashed. Everything that hits me kills me. No good. Find far less stressful to do Warfronts, ever at my meager Rank 13. Get killed a lot of times, but kill too, and often win.
    Yes!! I knew I wasn't crazy! Posts like this are exactly why I'm trying to emphasize expanding on that current (fun!) style of play, and adding both separate progression and serious challenge to it. Thanks for adding your voice!

    Who knows, maybe one day somebody'll listen!
    Last edited by MatipzieuKyA; 04-14-2012 at 08:12 PM.

  9. #114
    Prophet of Telara Goodberry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MatipzieuKyA View Post
    Yes!! I knew I wasn't crazy! Posts like this are exactly why I'm trying to emphasize expanding on that current (fun!) style of play, and adding both separate progression and serious challenge to it. Thanks for adding your voice!

    Who knows, maybe one day somebody'll listen!
    Thanks! I like a lot your suggestion for a 3rd kind of progression, as separated as the PvE and PvP ones already are.

    A caveat though: simply something being outdoor instead of instanced, is not, per se, a solution. Something else has to change. An example: this week I joined in an open door raid to do the Raid Rift with Dread Captain Bale. It was absolutely frustrating and after several fast wipes we disbanded. I examined the combat log and saw that everything DCB did (and he does a whole lot of things) hit for a minimum of 15k. That's exactly what gives me the "squashed bug" sensation.

    As I said in chat after we decided to quit trying, I haven't been playing this game for a year to be squashed by any drunkard with bad breath and an eyepatch. Much better to IGNORE the existence of such freaks, and treat them like bugs (of the other type) in the game.
    Last edited by Goodberry; 04-14-2012 at 08:38 PM.

  10. #115
    Rift Disciple MatipzieuKyA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Goodberry View Post
    Thanks! I like a lot your suggestion for a 3rd kind of progression, as separated as the PvE and PvP ones already are.

    A caveat though: simply something being outdoor instead of instanced, is not, per se, a solution. Something else has to change. An example: this week I joined in an open door raid to do the Raid Rift with Dread Captain Bale. It was absolutely frustrating and after several fast wipes we disbanded. I examined the combat log and saw that everything DCB did (and he does a whole lot of things) hit for a minimum of 15k. That's exactly what gives me the "squashed bug" sensation.

    As I said in chat after we decided to quit trying, I haven't been playing this game for a year to be squashed by any drunkard with bad breath and an eyepatch. Much better to IGNORE the existence of such freaks, and treat them like bugs (of the other type) in the game.
    Yup, this is exactly the core issue, and I tried to explain what it was that created this sensation (the feeling of being squashed) as well as specific ways to address it. (Second link in sig.) Raid rifts in my book use the exact same style of play that's employed in instances, including (1) highly scripted encounters, (2) strict HPS/DPS/mitigation requirements, (3) and certain numbers of players present with (4) very, very little scalability or flexibility, that (5) emphasizes tactical, "micro-skill" mechanic-check gameplay, rather than (6) strategic, "macro-skill" gameplay like outdoor invasions and rifts do.

    I actually tried to give mathematical proof in the post (basic high school pre-calculus) for how challenge can be created without the feeling of being "squashed" while keeping the feeling of being "powerful."

    (How's that for proof that 'casual v hardcore' is waaaaay too simplistic to model modern MMOs? Now back to topic...)
    Last edited by MatipzieuKyA; 04-14-2012 at 08:44 PM.

  11. #116
    Ascendant Skidrow Bro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,980

    Default

    Again people confusing doing only the end game raiding with everything else. I, and many others, don't want to just raid when I/we log into Rift. I want to be challenged and faced with obstacles within the world of Telara or any MMO for that matter. Trion has taken those obstacle away to appease to the very loud group of single players who appear to have issues with playing a genre that is about community and group effort
    Strive for Peace with acts of war
    The beauty of death we all adore
    I have no faith distracting me
    I know why your prayers will never be answered

  12. #117
    Ascendant JimboTCB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,549

    Default

    I do wish people would stop conflating "casual" with "bad/lazy"... It's quite possible to play the game casually but still do your bets to optimise your builds, get the best gear you have available, and actually play well. But when I see horribly geared people in experts, I don't assume they're casual, I just think they're crap at the game.

    And it's quite possible to raid successfully without needing to get obsessive and play all the time. In fact I'd suggest that "harcdore" guilds spend less time raiding than "casual" ones, as they're much better at making productive use of their available raiding time, instead of wasting hours being disorganised and wiping on stuff they should have on clear by now (although we do occasionally do that as well, but that's beside the point...)

    If I wanted to, right now I could log on twice a week for 4 hours at a time and clear every single piece of instanced raid content in the game. Sure, we'll be doing more raid days once ID comes out and everything's still new and exciting, but it's not like we'll be glued to our computers with a crate of Red Bull from the second 1.8 goes live.

    Ultimately, people don't raid because they don't like raiding - maybe they want to be a beautiful and unique snowflake with their joke DPS spec, maybe they just don't like having to cooperate with 19 other people. But to suggest that "casuals" don't raid purely because the content is too hard is just stupid.

  13. #118
    Ascendant Noaani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arus2001 View Post
    I
    Now, you may think gating people is a good system and the cyclical progression you implied is good for the community
    I don't, I think it is a horrible way to do things.

    My preference is for developers to implement easy, mid-difficulty and hard content for solo, group and raid. From there, the ideal is that the content is left as it is essentially for the life of the game.

    Like it or not, your opinions of time as it relates to hardcore or casual are completely pointless. While some games maybe pay per hour, this is a thread onthe Rift forums talkin about raiding in Rift, so I am only talking about things as they app to Rift. If you wish to talk on the topic in a more general sense, start a thread on the FoH boards.

    Now back to Rift, and the time debate. A simple way to put the point across: one guild clears HK once a week in five hours, another guild spends five hours, three nights a week clearing HK. Which is the more hardcore?

    The obvious answer is the first guild. Both are running the same content, but it takes the second guild three times as long to do it. The second guild may well be more determined, and may even have more fun doing it, but the first guild is without a doubt more hardcore.

    Now, in an MMO with unlimited top end content, time spent may well be a factor to consider. As above though, discussion such as this is not for the Rift boards.

    Your point about Trion adding methods of exclusion rather than inclusion, that is a glass had full/half empty type thing.

    People that want to be included in raid content will see the introduction of ID as something new for them to do with others. It may not be something they do the day it goes live, but most people have already figured out Trions way of passing content off from one group to another, so they know they will be doing it eventually.

    On the other hand, you have people that see it and feel excluded, even after being told how it will be passed down. People that want to feel excluded from raid content will feel excluded from raid contet, even if that content is not excluding them.

    There is nothing Trion can or should do about this, it is a job for a psychiatrist.
    Last edited by Noaani; 04-15-2012 at 03:57 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Debase View Post
    If the only target audience for Rift is disenfranchised WoW players, its doomed imo.

  14. #119
    Ascendant Galibier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    10,460

    Default

    And that last bit is pretty much it. These games have to serve more than one play style. Now people can say "hey look I have A, B and C that's great" or they can say "damn it I don't care about D, E and F why the heck do they bother with that." That is ultimately where these arguments start.

    I am going to be brutally honest here. I personally find the casual vs hardcore arguments to be disingenuous at their core. Almost as disingenuous as the anti-elitist arguments. Why? Typically the person championing the "casual" cause is trying to white knight their particular play style and take the moral high ground. Once they believe they have that anyone who disagrees with them can be easily (in their mind at least) painted as an unemployed basement dwelling hard core player or a socially maladjusted elitist.

    The problem is as has been pointed out time and time again their are hard core soloers, casual raiders etc. Casual and hardcore are not gaming styles they are mind sets and attitudes. BUT myths have been spun around them and people continue to try and give them a substance that they do not deserve.
    Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorius triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.

  15. #120
    Rift Disciple Lanceknight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lotham Server
    Posts
    149

    Default

    i still say its funny as hell, how all of this discussions about hardcore vs casual (though well enjoyed) came off the statement
    "the nerf to experts, was so bad that new players not learning basics within, and when they go to harder content they cant complete it and will cry for nerfs, so stop dumbing down the content."

    and yet noone in their long huge posts even addressed that
    ICEWATCH
    .........FEAR IS GOOD...IT MEANS THAT YOU'RE STILL ALIVE.......
    .........AND I HAVEN'T KILLED YOU YET........
    Proud Member of Moirae [11/11 HK] [4/9 ID]

+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts