Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: You know, you're kinda lucky Cody... | |
| Posted By: RC Master | Date: 12/13/10 10:31 p.m. |
In Response To: Re: You know, you're kinda lucky Cody... (Cody Miller) : If somebody is unable to enjoy a leisure activity without someone else : telling them how to derive enjoyment from it, then I am personally quite : sad for such a person. I just stumbled across a post on b.net that is self-admittedly the type of person you feel sorry for:
Even though the new credit system is more player friendly, so many players stopped playing (including myself) just because there was nothing pushing them to play. I am still playing halo 3, currently getting another 50. Other than to have fun, something is pushing me to play. Emphasis mine. heh. :) They can't get enjoyment out of games the same way you do, and maybe that does suck, and maybe you should feel sorry for them. Still, there are things the game designer(s) can do to help them derive more enjoyment from the game. To provide the "push to play" that they need to just start playing and then let the game's mechanics take over the moment-to-moment fun. : The whole point of playing games and engaging in
Ideally your 'work' would do that to, of course. Thing is, if they don't have some sort of goal, how can they be interested in it? You read a novel because you want to know how the plotline goes or evaluate the author's writing. You play a game's campaign to find out how the story goes or see what the gameplay is like. You play multiplayer to explore the maps and to find out what its like. etc. : In such a case, what is wrong with simply not playing? Go do something else
Theres nothing inherently wrong with not playing games. The problem comes when a player doesn't play simply because they're not aware of the additional oppurtunities for fun, stimulating activity that can be found within the game. A player gets bored of campaign because they're not aware of speedrunning or tricking. A player stops playing multiplayer because they're not aware of the goal of trying to work out strategies or working on their aim or play better, or trying to die less, or stepping out of their established niche and trying other playlists or styles or trying to understand the way the spawning works. A player gets bored of your game because they don't realise there is the oppurtunity to build whole maps or they haven't invested the time to get good at forging* and so it seems like so much effort and they don't yet see the intrinstric reward there or aren't sure its worth the time investment. If the above situations happen, thats bad, because that player is missing out fun, interesting experiences they could be having simply because they aren't aware of them, or don't see that the activity might become its own reward/fun with practice/developed skill. Not because they don't want fun : The problem though is that these are inherently manipulative, so that players
I'm don't think I get the point here. Are you trying to get at that some reward/investment systems can be addictive? And players continue to invest in them well past the point when the have lost all sense of fun from the core actions involved in the game? I can see that. But I'd say thats probably indicative that the reward system is flawed, or the game didn't really provide much oppurtunity for fun in and of itself to begin with. : Correct, but such systems are needed only when the game no longer is fun,
I disagree. I'm trying to get across the idea that there is potentially untapped fun to be had in a game and an investment system can help expose that to players who otherwise might not have found it. And, at the same time, when the fun level drops (e.g. because you're tired and are playing sucky or are taking on a challenge thats simply too great for you) a reward system can lessen the frustration there as well. : It is always trying to get you to play for the wrong reasons. The system says
Ok, maybe you're right on the first statement. But I disagree with the last bit. The system can encourage players to play in a new and fun way inside the same game or can expose them to new and potentially fun elements of the game that they may not have realised were even available. Just like achievements can do. They don't all have to be pure success based. : There are plenty of games that still respect the time of the player and are
I didn't say it had to be a in your face action game. I said 'non-cerebal/performance related'. And by that I mean activities that don't really require you to think that much or require a good deal of execution skill. Adventure and strategy games both require the former and simulation games will require mostly the latter. Sometimes people want/need a break from the intense stuff and do something relatively menial. That was mostly in defence of stuff like WoW or *shudder* Farmville or crappy television I guess. Not how investment systems in a game like Reach should be handled. : There is no line! Every incentive the developer offers the player necessarily
If the only fun a player is getting is in the receiving of the reward, then yeah thats wrong. But the reward, or not even ncessarily 'reward', just some 'goal' to structure the activity, is used as a kick-starter of sorts to get to the intrinsic fun of trying something new in the game or getting better at the game or simply succeeding within the game against some challenge. E.g. Maybe all you play is the Team Slayer playlist, but then you might start playing... Multi-team for example, becuase the daily challenges offered you 5000cR to stick 5 players in the same match and you found out that people online reckon that Elite Slayer in the Multi-team playlist is the quickest way to do it. BUT, you then might CONTINUE to play Multi-team and vote for Elite Slayer because you found it fun/hilarious/exhilirating for its own sake when you were going for the challenge. : Any player reward system can be exploited in some way. A bold statement to make about every conceivable and inconceivable reward system! : If your system offers
Well for starters you can have different measures of 'win' and you can vary the rewards with different amounts of 'win.' Even so, if a player is enticed by the reward system, that doesn't mean you can't reward for actions other than directly 'winning' (i.e. time investment), since a player will try to maximise their reward and hence maximise their level of 'win.' ---
*heh, I just thought of a mini-game you could have to get people to use forge and teach them various elements of building things with it: make a puzzle game out of it!
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |