raspberry jam, on 20 February 2013 - 11:29 AM, said:
I don't think you have been in a combat situation, nor received any sort of military training, ever.
Also, I'm not talking about realism, but offering a challenge instead of offering a time-based gate.
But actual exploration is only fun if the world that you explore has true value to you already, which in games is obtained by having good, fun gameplay. GW2 fails at that.
Anyway, that is the point: if you skip all the boring stuff, only the things that you claim to be "ruled by reward" is left. If the game had actually fun content, no one would be complaining. But it doesn't, it has fun rewards, but rewards are only fun when you get them, not when you have them.
I think gating is truly irrelevant to the longevity of a good game. As I said elsewhere in this thread, it was possible to complete Morrowind within seven minutes, and people still played that game intensely and for a long time.
Narrative gating is far more intuitive than level based gating. Example: not being able to get past a door because it's locked and you don't have the key, is far more intuitive than not being able to get past it because you don't have X number of abstract points that someone made up and is not part of the in-game world.
As for the funnel into a single line argument, the locked door only gates what is inside/beyond the door, not necessarily anything else, meaning that you can potentially keep the entire rest of the world open for adventure, whereas levels gate everything that is above the level range your character is at (and below it, unless there is downscaling far better than GW2's).
Glint's Challenge isn't about killing a dragon, it's about defending a baby dragon (that for some reason is full grown) from attackers. So I don't get what the "fighting glint" part comes from. Glint isn't even in that mission. Are you talking about Dragon's Lair? It's the only place you can fight her. It's also been soloed by a level 12.
Did you even play GW1?
True, nothing can track people's skill, except of course a record of challenges beat. And narrative gating allows one to build just that. That gimmick builds and running exists are flaws of the game (GW1 had lots of those), not in any way implying that narrative-based gating is a bad way to sort the events of a narrative.
And you learn nothing by leveling.
No, I don't mean that. Where did you derive that from? I mean that you should keep the vocabulary established in a certain franchise.
No I never had any kind of military training and short of paint ball was never in any kind of combat situation. With that information can you kindly please elaborate on which part of my statement if false? Do trained soldiers have a worst aim then an untrained person? Do trained soldiers in a life and death situation try to avoid vital organs to give their enemy a fighting chance or something? Or are you implying that if you end up in a mortal fight your chances of survival between a trained soldier and a civilian are the same? Because at the end of the day in my opinion of someone with no military training there are various factors that will make a soldier deadlier. There is what you're trying to imply. A soldier will find a better tactical position to engage you with better cover etc... But there is also the fact they'll likely have better reflexes due to training and a better aim. Both of these factors have no visual distinct component from a untrained person but both of these factors will still result in a more lethal outcome. In any case you're picking at straws and cheating. You're a game designer come on are you telling me the concept of simulating stuff in a simplified manner is foreign to you? Take a tab targeting game for example. Why does an attack use a random generator + modifiers to decide if that attack hits or not? in real life (well depending on your life phylosofy this might change) there is no random component to say a shooting. Its all skill and reactions. That cannot translate directly in the game so skill is instead simulated by a random number generator with better odds. This is no different. You level 3 bandit is your untrained civilian. you level 80 bandit is your uber experienced veteran soldier. They're still using the same type of weapon but the effectiveness of that weapon improves by the wielder experience and by having access to a better model of the same weapon type. When processing power becomes infinite and it becomes viable it would be great if we remove the simulation trickery and having each npc you fight seek shelter behind rocks, snipe you from a tree or ambush you with swat like precision. And why stop there? a gun should also be fully simulated down to the quantum level so with enough wear and tear we can have them jam and stuff. Can we please discuss stuff objectively rather then trying to twist words?
Fine Gw2 fails to be fun for you. I am sorry about that, I have lots of fun playing it personally. Considering the game population trend is on the rise I guess I am probably not the only one either.
You assumption is nothing in gw2 is fun, I disagree. Most of the game is fun. Not only that but I dont think people focus on reward because there is nothing fun to do, I think people purposefully ignore whats fun because they just want rewards.
Morrowind isnt a good example for several reasons. 1. The game isnt intended to be finished in 7 minutes. A new player cant just walk to the heart and kill. Its more like a cheat. Thats means no doubt people finished the game properly before they even tried the speed run. 2. The speed run itself became a game mode so to speak, a challenge for whom could finish the game quicker most likely done each time by people who not only finished the game but knew it well enough to do stuff blindfolded. Just look at a speed run video and you'll see what I mean people looting stuff, buying stuff, using potions etc.. in the blink of an eye. 3. No doubt not every player who finished morrowind continued playing. So no the fact that it was possible to finish morrowind in 7 minutes is by no means proof people would happily play all the game once finished.
I strongly disagree. If a new player wants to go to the ring of fire islands for the sake of argument, s/he can spend his/her entire life exploring all of guild wars s/he will never know why they cannot go there (unless goes through the entire storyline but again nothing will indicate that needs to be done at all to unlock this area. What logical sense does it even make? its not like the islands didnt exist before the specific mission . (obviously goes without saying here we're talking about the feedback the game gives you and how intututive that is. One can go online and find out what they have to do no problem)
On the other hand going by your own example you knew immediately that the reason why that bandit killed you is because you were not high level enough. Not only that but you were still free to roam around as long as you avoided fights.
Answering your specific example itself. If you find a lock door you know you'll need to get the key sure but if thats part of a narrative gate you'll only know that if you're following the storyline. (no gating is an issue if you're following it directly including leveling) Trick is if the door you want to open is something that occurs in mission 12 and you still didnt do any single mission coming across the door has you stuck. You will not know where the key is and you will never be able to acquire it until you do the 12 previous missions even though its most likely the play / npc who has the key is already in game and you can interact with them. How is that more intuitive or not as much made up as an abstract leveling system? One could argue the door itself is an abstract gate. I mean in this game your character can probably cut down dragons and other giant colossal beings yet now a puny door / gate halts his progress because story says so?
Only problem with that argument is such gates and doors generally block far more then just a small hut. in Gw1 for example story blocked entire zones, areas and dungeons. Leveling if anything blocks far less. At level 1 I am still free to get to Orr I just am no match for mobs there but at least I am not physically prevented from getting there.
You're absolutely right, mixed those two missions, Appologies. You fight waves of destroyers not glint in that challenge you're right. The point remains however. The time it takes to prepare one self to take on glint's challenge solo is so large you can level multiple gw2 characters to max level no doubt.
You learn nothing by leveling? in 99% of the time its exactly the same thing. Think about it so we agree narrative gating has you do a particular mission and your ability to beat it is proof you learn the game enough to progress fair enough. What is one actually doing why leveling? hmmm doing missions perhaps?
raspberry jam, on 20 February 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:
That is why they shouldn't have put in huge enemies that does nothing except stand there and look dangerous until you kill them by spamming 2. Once you actually finish the game you might understand what I mean.
Zaithan isnt the only dragon in the game. If you play it a bit now and then you might know that.