|
Almost every game that is played competitively rests on the game being completely flat in terms of access to in-game capabilities, and games with progression systems that are played competitively are either completely unlocked or have their progression systems neutralized. An argument that claims that progression systems actually make things balanced seems ludicrous to me
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 16:15 |
|
|
Literally any game played competitively is played on a 100% save file whether it's got a progression system or not, are you joking edit: professional tetris is played on a 100% save file, and it's tetris
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:45
|
|
|
man I really dislike the payday and killing floor games, like a lot
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:45
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Multiplayer games have had progression unlocks for at least ten years now, seems a little late to be mad about them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
The progression system in Splatoon is really good because you can obsess about it if you want but in the end it doesn't matter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
Quest For Glory II posted:Skulltag is better than any modern multiplayer This but unironically
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
Competitive Guitar Hero is played on a 100% save file edit: And yknow, I think you guys are right, progression systems in MP games really are bad, except that they extend the lifespan of the game, give you something to enjoy working towards and the satisfaction of unlocking it, get more people into the game because everyone starts on even ground, and reward the player for staying interested and devoting their time to it. I'm glad we've come to an agreement that actually the systems that have been included in nearly every multiplayer game for the past several years have all been wrong to do so
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
Prey is like dirt cheap everywhere and I strongly recommend it
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
Sakurazuka posted:Multiplayer games have had progression unlocks for at least ten years now, seems a little late to be mad about them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:get more people into the game because everyone starts on even ground You keep saying this and it makes no sense. Adding a progression system to a game literally does the opposite by barring a new player from content. When you don't have a progression system and everything starts unlocked, that is when everyone is on equal footing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:You'd be wrong. Having no progression encourages people to stick with only the best weapons, characters etc and encourages a metagame where you are at an objective disadvantage if you don't use what everyone else is using. Giving players access to an expanding arsenal of stuff means that everyone starts on the same foot and then from there they can pick and choose what they want as they reach that milestone which overall leads to a much higher variation in equipped items. I think it depends. The Last of Us multiplayer had "progression", but the progression ended very quickly and yet people kept playing, for example.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
I enjoy working towards things but anyway my guy's only been playing for a couple hours and he has like ten grand where you need fifteen for Luke so I feel like the cost reduction EA did meant something. unless that Reddit post or whatever where the dude tallied it up as requiring 40 hours was a fib lmao
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:00
|
|
|
Sakurazuka posted:Multiplayer games have had progression unlocks for at least ten years now, seems a little late to be mad about them. Seriously. I don't always like progression systems, and they can get in the way and be too grindy, but raging about them in TYOOL 2017 is just silly. They've been around for over a decade and they're here to stay. Don't get me wrong, I also like shooters without them too, and variety is the spice of life so I'm not saying all games need them. In fact, ones that shoehorn them in just piss me off. But most competetive games tend to use a fairly flat progression, giving starting players the most "balanced," simple to use weapons in their class (e.g. Titanfall 2 and any Battlefield game) which has undeniably eased a lot of people into the multiplayer FPS genre. Something like Battlefront on the other hand, where it's literal stat upgrades...
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
grieving for Gandalf posted:I enjoy working towards things 40 hours was before they lowered the cost
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
Im glad fighting games never adopted progression and the one that did (SFV) was a complete commercial failure
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:Literally any game played competitively is played on a 100% save file whether it's got a progression system or not, are you joking CJacobs posted:Competitive Guitar Hero is played on a 100% save file Right, so the game that everyone wants to play competitively is with the 100% save file, making the progression construct entirely just a system of roadblocks and annoyances. I don't know if you thought you were mounting a counterargument but you are just saying things that are not logically coherent
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
I don't think time is a reason to say it's not worth criticizing a certain game design. Like horse armor is still hosed up. Remember horse armor
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:06
|
|
|
It's good to protect your horse
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
Progression systems are fun and also quite good for new players. If Codblops gave you all the perks and weapons right from the get go I'd have no clue where to even start, since decision paralysis is a real thing. With the progression system, though, things get doled out over time and I experiment way more since I only need to test out a couple new things at once, rather than a whole library of glowing "NEW!" exclamation marks or whatever (this all gets messier when you go to mobas and fighting games, though, since character selection in those games is so incredibly important that it's a bad idea to lock them behind progression). This all goes out the window when the progression systems are terrible, which is a big problem with microtransactions blowing up. The Call of Duties back when I played them had fantastic progression that didn't take too long to get to the good stuff, but now that there's an incentive to make progression slow and godawful they're kinda getting worse. I don't spend much time in the AAA zone these days though so I'm mostly speaking off of impressions here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
In Training posted:Im glad fighting games never adopted progression and the one that did (SFV) was a complete commercial failure To be fair, it was a commercial disaster for many more reasons than just that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
In Training posted:I don't think time is a reason to say it's not worth criticizing a certain game design. Like horse armor is still hosed up. Remember horse armor Horse armor was dumb because there was never a good reason to use a horse unless you were actively playing the game as someone who never fast travels and also loves their horse enough to dress them up. Shadowmere couldn't even die so it's not like you even ever needed to put her in armor anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
I find it hard to believe anyone could still be mad about horse armour
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
Horse armor is harmless because its optional DLC that doesn't even have gameplay behind. Its of course not worth buying at all, but that just means you can safely ignore it. I never had a problem with it. Its downright quaint compared to the festering abomination that paid DLC has turned into in the year 2017.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Sakurazuka posted:I find it hard to believe anyone could still be mad about horse armour Bethesda brought it back up with their whole paid mods thing so it's kinda back in vogue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
I mean, I love progression systems in single-player and cooperative games. Give me more numbers. Give me more menus. Give me more colors of poo poo, it's all good. But if we're talking about any kind of competitive situation and someone else has access to more options that materially and significantly affect gameplay simply because they've played for longer, and the options that I would want to use are arbitrarily time-locked to take longer to get to than other options I don't care about, then you've probably lost me
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:24
|
|
|
at least the Progression Fad is finally ending, its hard to see Overwatch as anything but a rejection of that. of course Overwatch is bad in its own way cause they replaced one psychologically manipulative player retention scheme for another one that's even worse, but one step at a time...
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
In Training posted:I don't think time is a reason to say it's not worth criticizing a certain game design. Like horse armor is still hosed up. Remember horse armor Didn't Injustice 2 do this?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
Also in "I guess they could have just always sold these for less" news I checked out Toys R Us a little while ago for amiibo and noticed the other Toys-To-Life sections are still pretty stocked because I guess they literally can't throw the stock away and they can't send it back, so with the exception of Lego Dimensions everything else is in literal fire-sale mode. Skylander things from only 2015 and 2016 like the various vehicles they could never sell that used to go for fifteen dollars are down to around two dollars and fifty cents. Disney Infinity is Buy 1 get 4 free. We will literally pay you to take this merchandise off the shelves.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
the only progression system i need is speedrunning REmake to get barry's handgun being serious, i'm eh on progression in shooters cause if i like a game i'll probably just play it regardless and i don't need to be drip-fed combat options to keep me playing. but it's better than the idea of shoving them into fighting games by making you unlock characters
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:Not having a progression system at all would be pretty boring having all characters from the start works for overwatch
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
lets all play slidequake
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
let's all play quake live, I say again two months in a row
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:31
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:having all characters from the start works for overwatch Maybe 'you can't play hanzo until you've played 100 hours of support' would create some healthy multiplayer habits in some people
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:31
|
|
|
Colonel did you go back and check out the Mysterious Asian Man after Mike dies?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Sunning posted:It looks like EA might be suspending real money purchases for Battlefront 2. Wow I'm kind of shocked they are doing this for real. All micro-transactions will be disabled at launch.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:having all characters from the start works for overwatch Also PUBG
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
The Disney CEO (Bob Iger, which from what I heard is a ruthless guy)apparently was talking to one of the EA CEOs before this was pulled, so he probably told EA knock that poo poo off. https://www.gamespot.com/articles/star-wars-battlefront-2-drops-microtransactions-te/1100-6455042/
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 16:15 |
|
|
I wish Super Smash Bros didn’t have you unlock characters and poo poo
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2017 03:41
|
|
