Dismiss Notice
This Section is READ ONLY - All Posts Are Archived

A note to the developers

Discussion in 'Release 33 Feedback Forum' started by dreamlarp, Sep 14, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dreamlarp

    dreamlarp Avatar

    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida keys
    First I would like to say that this note is being written by an ex-economist with over 15 years on Wall street NYC and also a game developer who not only owned my own company but also was the lead designer.


    There are many points that I have noted about your possess in this games development that concern me as a backer.


    1. What you are trying to do with the economy is not balancing its manipulation. First thing that you need to do is hire a statistician who is specialized in game balancing. Your job is not to create a healthy economy. Your job is to create a fair system with opportunities for the players who put in a large amount of time or can innovate to flourish and do well. You cannot control the fact that wealth will flow to the top after you have raised the money for the development with a tiered reward system. That in and of itself created privileged. The best you can do at this point is create a system that is fair across the board that rewards time and effort and then step out of the process. The most you should be doing at that point is guarding against cheaters and exploiters.

    2. Your concept of a non-linear advancement system is just the reason a large amount of games went belly up. The system you are making at this pint does not reward players for their time and effort. In fact, it is akin to making the time and sacrifice your longtime supporters have put in null and void. Players need to know that if they spent much more time than others may have that they will be more advanced. A non-linear system attracts players who want it all without putting in the time and effort. Those same type of players are the most non-loyal type of player. If you keep a non-linear progression system you will lose, in the end of players that you want to play your game. Ones that will stay with you for ears and continue to spend.


    I was taught that in the end even if I think my concepts are innovative and ground breaking I still must ask myself is this game fun for the players. This is a question that I think your team has stopped asking themselves.
     
    Quenton, Kilhwch, Hawkeyes and 10 others like this.
  2. Tahru

    Tahru Avatar

    Messages:
    4,800
    Likes Received:
    12,170
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Spite
    Great post overall. I agree with point #1 in principle. However, something to consider with option #2. Many players have said they feel significantly disadvantaged from players that spend extreme hours. Others say they have to grind too much to be competitive the way they want to. The current non-linear advancement does significantly help all those people and does not harm the extreme players either. Not many games try to be everything to everyone. But given the challenge, this strategy is the only way to do it. But some tweaking to the dials may improve it.
     
  3. sdbaynham

    sdbaynham Avatar

    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    93
    Trophy Points:
    8
    EVE Online

    Haven and Hearth
     
  4. dreamlarp

    dreamlarp Avatar

    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida keys
    It does hurt the extreme grinders and casual grinders alike. Just look at the examples we have from the past, swg, Eq ect all who changed to attract the players who wan't to compete without putting in the time and effort. Any game that looks to try and grab both types of player fails. Yes the players who want to feel like they can compete without the work are many but history and study have shown that they are also not loyal to game. The games that reward time and effort have lasted the longest. The best example is UO. Yes I went there. But you cannot deny that they have lasted. The dupers and cheaters knocked them down not the system. I have studied the life of games the the types of players it takes to have a lasting game and the games that will last are the ones that supply content for explorers, loot for the loot hounds and crafting for the crafters. But they all require a time vrs reward system to thrive. Simply put if you cannot put in the time to get further in your game then you are not the type that will stick with your game.
     
  5. Burzmali

    Burzmali Avatar

    Messages:
    1,290
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think I've found the subtle flaw on your reasoning. 20 years ago UO players didn't have a job, today SOTA players don't need a second one.
     
  6. Toff

    Toff Avatar

    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    224
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Kingsport
    Very good post, however I agree with Tahru on the second point, I like the way they are trying to make the game enjoyable for the different types of player ( I'll list them below)

    Player types (IMHO)


    1. The player who has real world money but not a lot of time to devote to "Grinding" This player has a limited number of hours to enjoy the game and doesn't want to grind out gold or resources, they would rather use their real world cash to take care of the mundane issues and concentrate on the game content/story line/leveling etc.
    2. The player who doesn't have a lot of cash but is able to live in the game. This player logs many hours and can grind out gold and resources and level up like crazy and doesn't need to hit up the add-on store to advance.
    3. The player who has real world money AND lives in the game. This player is hard to beat, they will always be far ahead of other players, these people bought city and castle lots, formed guilds, bought POT's and filled them up. Other players will always be jealous of these guys and crash the boards about how unfair this is. I don't have any factual numbers but I would guess these guys take up less than 1% of the accounts.
    4. The player who doesn't have real world money NOR a lot of time to play the game. These players can have plenty of fun playing this game if they have realistic expectations, if they expect or think they are entitled to the same in-game rewards as the above player types they will be disappointed.
    I think the current system (although not perfect) does a great job of making the game enjoyable for everyone. They give the add-on store for people who would rather just spend cash to get things, they reward those who log in plenty of hours by not limiting their gains ( I have seen others post opinions on limiting the gains of these players so players with lessor time can keep up ) and they give options for those who don't want to "keep up with the jones's" like single player more or friends only mode, and they can always live out of a bank. Again, the system isn't perfect yet but it's going in a great direction. I completely agree with the OP's first point and think the devs should not try and control the economy as much as just making it fair and equal for all. The problem is how these different types of players only want things to be THEIR way, and anything else is unfair. Like the guy who logs in a lot of hours saves enough gold to buy his village lot and craft his own house to place on it, then some guy comes in buys a bundled account buys a town lot next to him and puts up a bigger house. The very same day he creates his account. The fairness of this example is has 2 sides, if you can not see this point you might be part of the problem.
     
    uhop, Anvar, Concord and 7 others like this.
  7. Lord_Darkmoon

    Lord_Darkmoon Avatar

    Messages:
    4,350
    Likes Received:
    14,680
    Trophy Points:
    153
    I think this is me ;) But I am in the game for the story and the quests and I am asking myself if I will be able to enjoy it without having to grind or be constantly low on money and cannot buy new equipment in order to get gear good enough to continue the story and enter the tougher story-zones...
     
    uhop, Alexander, randomonium and 5 others like this.
  8. Burzmali

    Burzmali Avatar

    Messages:
    1,290
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm pretty sure you are forgetting those players that feel that time and money should not be the only factors in determining the "haves" in a game. I can "compete" with veterans in most non-MMO games within a few weeks of starting them, such will never be the case in SOTA.
     
  9. kaeshiva

    kaeshiva Avatar

    Messages:
    3,054
    Likes Received:
    11,752
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    My only issue is that the ratio between cash you can earn grinding ('the faucet') and cash you have to spend on essentials ('the cash sinks') is out of proportion.
    We shouldn't have to make reagent free deck because reagents, repair kits, etc. aren't affordable, that's just basic playability of the game.
    This has nothing to do with what people are paying for equipment, gear, etc. I'm talking the very basics, income vs. NPC standardized reagent cost, needs adjusting.

    All of the essentials - repair kits, reagents, arrows, whatever - are taking up all the money you can make grinding.
    There's nothing left to spend on gear upgrades, taxed lots, or god forbid, anything 'nice to have' like a piece of furniture or etc.
    The "nice to haves" should be the cash sinks. NOT the "need to have, to even play the game" stuff.
    Crafting fuels is another fine example of something that is ridiculously overpriced and needs a serious overhaul.
    Crafting is already a huge sink in terms of time, producer xp, gathering, hours upon HOURS a day of refining stuff, made even worse by the ridiculous breakage rates even at grandmaster skill to try and make anything even remotely marketable. The fuel costs are just downright unnecessary punishment for crafters who have no reliable way to make an income making anything unless they sell the very materials that they need to progress their craft!


    So, that's the problem. Basic quality of life, grind monsters, sell loot, restock things needed to grind monsters? Is broke.
    There's nothing left.
    Lower NPC costs for essential wares and people might have a little bit extra to spend in the "economy."
     
  10. Gix

    Gix Avatar

    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    4,014
    Trophy Points:
    153
    While I believe this to be true, I don't agree with the reasons why you think so.
     
    Roycestein Kaelstrom likes this.
  11. dreamlarp

    dreamlarp Avatar

    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida keys
    I say this because time and time again the dev's have dug their heals and and said NO no matter how much the players do not like something. Exp.. fast travel, other races ect.. There have been many many post out these things but they have shut them down over and over. I totally get they want to make things realistic but really how much realism do we need in a GAME? They have some amazing idea's but we must remember that there are some great concepts out there like our concept of democracy witch is amazing except for the fact that there are people involved.
     
  12. Toff

    Toff Avatar

    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    224
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Kingsport
    No, I'm not forgetting these people I'm discarding them as being unrealistic.
     
  13. majoria70

    majoria70 Avatar

    Messages:
    10,347
    Likes Received:
    24,869
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    United States
    Wow you are terrific and yes this is it in a nutshell and and much of the reasons why opinions vary so drastically between people. We have and will have the something for everyone type of game. ;) Not everyone will be satisfied and some will move on and perhaps later they will come back and move on again. That is active gaming. It is the cycle. For some this will be 'the game' and they will play as long as they can.

    So thus we are here to get as much of the 'something for everyone' that we can into this game. Anything less would be sacrilege for this game. Lol I had to look that up to see if it was strong enough for my point ;). Thanks again. I loved reading what you wrote, it really was perfect in it's description of types of players here and what is happening. The reasons we go back and fourth and the reasons some feel slighted and some don't and on and on. lol

    And I had to clarify the meaning to my use of sacrilege too for myself as well and for those who say hmmm she has lost it lol. And sacrilege in this case is disrespect and irreverence, and while said jokingly looking at SOTA as is sacred is the joking part, but not totally in a way. I said it in a way but to honor and highlight the HUGE effort the Dev team is putting into this game. It is beyond huge in fact, and I know it will continue in that way. I truly know this. I've watched it for 3 well getting close to almost 4 years. They are amazing putting up with us making the game this way just to make the best game they can. We should have a post about what type of player are you ;), well j/k, we don't want to give it away lol ;) So I bow to you as well and Great job and great post. :)

    sac·ri·lege
    ˈsakrəlij/
    noun
    1. violation or misuse of what is regarded as sacred.
      "putting ecclesiastical vestments to secular use was considered sacrilege"
      synonyms: desecration, profanity, blasphemy, impiety, irreligion, unholiness, irreverence, disrespect,profanation
      "any form of gambling on the church grounds, including bingo and raffles, would be sacrilege" *edited*
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2016
  14. Burzmali

    Burzmali Avatar

    Messages:
    1,290
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    To you it is unrealistic, to those that have played games made after 2005, it is expected, hence the disagreement. Though, those that feel that time or money should be the determining factors in winning a game are probably going to be playing "Crush of Clans", "Clans of War", "Crush of War" or whatever the latest flavor of the month is.
     
    Roycestein Kaelstrom likes this.
  15. Toff

    Toff Avatar

    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    224
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Kingsport
    I know the devs are working on this, I have seen many posts about how hard it is. This is a real problem and I'm confident it will be addressed before game launch. Remember that we are still Play-testing even though the world is now persistent.
     
    Roycestein Kaelstrom and Tahru like this.
  16. Toff

    Toff Avatar

    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    224
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Kingsport

    I copied a post I made to another thread below that further explains my position on this matter........

    OP = [Quote : "What you are saying is that players that have invested a lot of time are entitied to big profits which is a dangerous proposition in a closed economy."]

    My Response = Not sure what you mean by "entitled" and "profits"? They get the collective bounty of their work. Let's say and average player earns 1k/hr. If I play/farm for 5 hour a week I earn 5k gold. If a different player plays/farms for 20 hours a week he earns 20k. No one is entitled here, there are no better or worse profits. "Entitlement" would be the guy only playing 5 hours a week wanting and getting what the guy playing 20 hours a week gets. I like to call them Millennials.
     
    Ao Soliwilos and Elwyn like this.
  17. dreamlarp

    dreamlarp Avatar

    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida keys
    You are correct, they are working very hard on this. Please do not mistake what I wrote as anger for what they have done for us. In fact I am happy they are working this hard. My point is they are working hard at something that is out of their hands. They need someone who is good at balancing numbers to level the playing field. Not trying to make the economy better themselves. This is hard to hear but I had to learn this myself.

    And I do get that they are trying to make the game for all types of player but they really do have to choose if they want this game to last.
    This is a great example. thank you.

    MMO's that last have to have a base type of player that can stick with them and also help pay the bills. Pay to win is a short term boost on money but does not last. ect..
    There are very clear examples and also great studies on this. The same can be said about trying to level the playing field for players who spend a small amount of time in games but look for the same power of longer time players. all games can only have a small amount of these players and stay n business. I(n the end the game has to be fun, rewarding and pay it's bills.
     
  18. Burzmali

    Burzmali Avatar

    Messages:
    1,290
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As before, your are saying that if a player is logging 20 hours a day, they are entitlied to make 20 times more money and have 20 times more stuff than a player who logs one hour a day, even if all they did is run in circles murdering wildlife for those 20 hours.
     
  19. Burzmali

    Burzmali Avatar

    Messages:
    1,290
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think this is a misunderstanding, competing isn't the same as having the same power. For example, in SotA, only the 10% will be able to sell through public vendors as they are the only ones with a near zero time expense while having leveled crafting enough to make better items, the rest of us can't compete.
     
  20. Toff

    Toff Avatar

    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    224
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Kingsport
    Yes, that is my position. I understand we disagree.
     
    Ao Soliwilos likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.