Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help
- - - - -

The difference between grinding and farming?


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 gopeone

gopeone

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 39 posts

Posted 11 March 2014 - 10:20 AM

deleted on your own will.
Link : http://www.guildwars...ission-with-it/

Edited by gopeone, 13 March 2014 - 03:52 AM.


#2 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4843 posts

Posted 11 March 2014 - 10:52 AM

View Postgopeone, on 11 March 2014 - 10:20 AM, said:

Grinding comes from gear grind.(I know very smart.)The real or original meaning of grinding is that you go to "dungeons" or zones and  grind directly for the materials or gear.

"Farm" actually means both cultivating land for the purposes of reaping crops from it, and the collection of variable profits from a fixed investment. Now I don't know if gold farmers invest anything. Their time, maybe.

Edited by Neo Nugget, 12 March 2014 - 07:44 PM.


#3 gw2guruaccount

gw2guruaccount

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 892 posts

Posted 11 March 2014 - 12:06 PM

Let's use the GW2 Legendary.

If we define Farming as indirect and Grinding as direct functions of the same behavior ( goal-oriented repetition )  the two very quickly blur in modern gaming. A version of this is just saying you need something basic and widely available like gold so while you grind for that T6 material you will also acquire things that are worth gold or gold itself and then fulfill both needs at the same time.

#4 gopeone

gopeone

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 39 posts

Posted 11 March 2014 - 12:15 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 11 March 2014 - 10:52 AM, said:

"Farm" actually means both cultivating land for the purposes of reaping crops from it, and the collection of variable profits from a fixed investment. Now I don't know if gold farmers invest anything. Their time, maybe.
Closed kids

Edited by gopeone, 13 March 2014 - 05:36 PM.


#5 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4843 posts

Posted 11 March 2014 - 12:36 PM

View Postgopeone, on 11 March 2014 - 12:15 PM, said:

I was just making a joke.
The world is a joke that we tell together, my friend.

#6 Kattar

Kattar

    Your Shoulder to Cry On

  • Administrators
  • 2227 posts

Posted 11 March 2014 - 09:34 PM

Is this meant to be a discussion thread?

You are fooling yourself, user. Nothing here is what it seems. ANet is not the plucky hero, Guru is not an evil empire, and this is not the grand arena.



Questions about moderation? For the love of Balthazar ask them here!


#7 gopeone

gopeone

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 39 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 04:01 PM

View PostKattar, on 11 March 2014 - 09:34 PM, said:

Is this meant to be a discussion thread?
Closed so why hope for a proper discussion?

Edited by gopeone, 13 March 2014 - 05:30 PM.


#8 gopeone

gopeone

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 39 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 06:06 PM

Closed forever

Edited by gopeone, 13 March 2014 - 05:27 PM.


#9 DonZardeone

DonZardeone

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 28 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:04 PM

I've always seen it like this:

Farming: Doing same or similar things over and over again to get currency or stuff to get things you don't need. Farming gold to buy skins for example. Getting gold to get extras. GW1 had mostly farming. You could buy perfect stat gear from NPCs for little money. The pretty stuff needed to be farmed to afford.

Grinding: Doing the same things over and over again to get things you need. Exp grinding, money grinding to buy upgrades, grinding for specific things to increase a reputation counter that gives you better skills or more damage.

Depending on your point of view, ascended gear is either a grind or a farm. If you need ascended gear to be competitive, then it is a grind. Don't need it? Farm. There only needs to be one person to require another person to have ascended gear or be kicked out of a party, to turn it into a grind.

Farming is:
- Repetitive actions or series of actions
- Not deemed required
- Goal is to get extras, like pocket money, impulse buys, just having a big number in your wallet
- Since it is not required, we do it when we feel like it, can be considered pleasant.
- Mental image of a farmer on a field tending to his land


Grinding is:
- Repetitive actions or series of actions
- Required for progress
- Goal is to get better stuff, stat-wise
- Since it is required, stress levels increase, feels like a chore, can be considered unpleasant.
- Mental image of grinder in a mill or someone grinding away at a metal or other material, with a grinding rod or other grinding tool. Looks exhausting but needed in order to make a blade or tool or flour.

#10 Konzacelt

Konzacelt

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 571 posts
  • Location:a prairie under a clear, blue sky
  • Guild Tag:[PD]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:33 PM

I always thought grinding was for levels and farming was for gear.  Is it more complicated than that?

#11 MazingerZ

MazingerZ

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2278 posts
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[CYRL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:37 PM

My definition has always been that farming is repetitive actions, to the point of mechanical precision... but somehow not falling down the well of 'miserable' slough,  Basically, there were days in WoW where I was content to just farm ore to sell for gold while I was waiting for a queue to pop or because I was watching TV or something.  There was no real goal in mind, except to earn money.

Grind I always associated with something that I was fairly tired of doing and required a certain level of will to repeat, because it had since lost its luster in pursuit of the rewards.  Grinding honor in WoW PvP for the gear.  Grinding for blue mats in GW2.
It's okay to enjoy crap if you're willing to admit it's crap.
Every patch is like ArenaNet walking out onto the stage of the International Don't Kitten Up Championship, and then proceeding to shiv itself in the stomach 30 times while screaming "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD! IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

#12 Kymeric

Kymeric

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1984 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:37 PM

They're both doing stuff primarily for the extrinsic reward, rather than enjoying the content itself.

So in my book, there's no appreciable difference.

#13 Konzacelt

Konzacelt

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 571 posts
  • Location:a prairie under a clear, blue sky
  • Guild Tag:[PD]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 12 March 2014 - 09:08 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 12 March 2014 - 08:37 PM, said:

My definition has always been that farming is repetitive actions, to the point of mechanical precision... but somehow not falling down the well of 'miserable' slough,  Basically, there were days in WoW where I was content to just farm ore to sell for gold while I was waiting for a queue to pop or because I was watching TV or something.  There was no real goal in mind, except to earn money.

Grind I always associated with something that I was fairly tired of doing and required a certain level of will to repeat, because it had since lost its luster in pursuit of the rewards.  Grinding honor in WoW PvP for the gear.  Grinding for blue mats in GW2.

I see.

I played an mmo several years back where grinding was specifically only associated with leveling(it took weeks for each of the last quarter of levels, and perhaps a month for the very last level if you didn't have a cash shop item to help).  And farming was going out to "farm" drops from mobs like mats, gear, items, anything you needed for anything.  Basically, if the word "level" was present anywhere it was grinding, if not then it was farming lol.

It wasn't a very popular game...the terms were probably localized and not universal in the game-world. :unsure:

Who comes up with these terms anywho?

#14 gopeone

gopeone

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 39 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 10:22 PM

View PostKonzacelt, on 12 March 2014 - 08:33 PM, said:

I always thought grinding was for levels and farming was for gear.  Is it more complicated than that?
Closed

Edited by gopeone, 13 March 2014 - 05:27 PM.


#15 gopeone

gopeone

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 39 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 10:28 PM

View PostKonzacelt, on 12 March 2014 - 09:08 PM, said:

I see.

I played an mmo several years back where grinding was specifically only associated with leveling(it took weeks for each of the last quarter of levels, and perhaps a month for the very last level if you didn't have a cash shop item to help).  And farming was going out to "farm" drops from mobs like mats, gear, items, anything you needed for anything.  Basically, if the word "level" was present anywhere it was grinding, if not then it was farming lol.

It wasn't a very popular game...the terms were probably localized and not universal in the game-world. :unsure:

Who comes up with these terms anywho?
Closed and no more

Edited by gopeone, 13 March 2014 - 05:28 PM.


#16 ChuyDog08

ChuyDog08

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 186 posts
  • Location:California, USA
  • Server:Dragonbrand

Posted 12 March 2014 - 11:33 PM

Farming - You don't mind doing it

Grinding - You don't like doing it

#17 Moharis Frostreign

Moharis Frostreign

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 116 posts
  • Location:Denver
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[AI]
  • Server:Yak’s Bend

Posted 12 March 2014 - 11:34 PM

Grind is pretty much farming+time. It's that feeling of duration really.

#18 Andemius

Andemius

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 699 posts
  • Guild Tag:[herd]
  • Server:Desolation

Posted 13 March 2014 - 01:11 AM

Personally I'd class farming as something I might enjoy, rather than grinding which is somthing I would not.

It's a very slight differentiation, but to use the same example, I did UWSC in gw1 and enjoyed 55hp farming simply for the challenge or appreciation of the build.

To me, grinding is having to spend vast amounts of time doing something I don't enjoy. Farming is something I can drop in and out of when the mood takes me.

That being said, gw2 doesn't seem to differentiate between the two.

#19 Alex Dimitri

Alex Dimitri

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1203 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 03:55 PM

View PostAndemius, on 13 March 2014 - 01:11 AM, said:



That being said, gw2 doesn't seem to differentiate between the two.

This is oh so very true, while GW2 doesn`t have classic gear treadmill, it has unusual cruel RNG (sucky droprate) for anything worthwhile.So instead of farming (playing) for gear "Ascended" we are forced to craft it with expensive mats and process intentionally streched in time (or ridiculously expensive if you are inpatient).
Things might not be so gloomy if GW2 didn`t have so much money sinks, so you could make some "savings"....but as we know anything you touch in GW2 will force you to spend gold in this or that way !

Needless to say I like very old fashioned MMO player am used to do both grind/farm.....unfortunately GW2 gives only very specific way to get "rich" in MMO terms and that is manipulating TP power trading (which has negative impact on almost all casual and hardcore players) introducing inflation and turning your hard earned gold in worthless penny`s !

In short no matter how much time you invest, how good you are in farming or grinding gear you will not benefit much from it, this is real shame.....since in my opinion i love much more to repeat stuff (dungeons) and get stuff i need (as drop) instead of crafting it or just plain old "go and buy" crap way !

#20 Konzacelt

Konzacelt

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 571 posts
  • Location:a prairie under a clear, blue sky
  • Guild Tag:[PD]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 13 March 2014 - 04:11 PM

View PostAlex Dimitri, on 13 March 2014 - 03:55 PM, said:

This is oh so very true, while GW2 doesn`t have classic gear treadmill, it has unusual cruel RNG (sucky droprate) for anything worthwhile.So instead of farming (playing) for gear "Ascended" we are forced to craft it with expensive mats and process intentionally streched in time (or ridiculously expensive if you are inpatient).
Things might not be so gloomy if GW2 didn`t have so much money sinks, so you could make some "savings"....but as we know anything you touch in GW2 will force you to spend gold in this or that way !

Needless to say I like very old fashioned MMO player am used to do both grind/farm.....unfortunately GW2 gives only very specific way to get "rich" in MMO terms and that is manipulating TP power trading (which has negative impact on almost all casual and hardcore players) introducing inflation and turning your hard earned gold in worthless penny`s !

In short no matter how much time you invest, how good you are in farming or grinding gear you will not benefit much from it, this is real shame.....since in my opinion i love much more to repeat stuff (dungeons) and get stuff i need (as drop) instead of crafting it or just plain old "go and buy" crap way !

ANet does all that because of their insane anti-griefing and equalization philosophy.  They really don't want anyone to get rich(no matter how well-earned it may be) because then a player might "lord it over" poorer players.  And that could get feelings hurt. :qq:

They probably see themselves as benevolent arbiters of an equal community of gamers where anything outside their defined parameters of normalcy has to be "reigned back in" for the good of all.

Or something.

#21 MazingerZ

MazingerZ

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2278 posts
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[CYRL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 13 March 2014 - 04:18 PM

View PostKonzacelt, on 13 March 2014 - 04:11 PM, said:

ANet does all that because of their insane anti-griefing and equalization philosophy.  They really don't want anyone to get rich(no matter how well-earned it may be) because then a player might "lord it over" poorer players.  And that could get feelings hurt. :qq:

They probably see themselves as benevolent arbiters of an equal community of gamers where anything outside their defined parameters of normalcy has to be "reigned back in" for the good of all.

Or something.

It's because at no point do they want their revenue to fluctuate poorly due to an influx of gold that enables people to convert to gems.  Ideally, they want a good portion of the player-base gold-poor so they spend cash.  Gold generation that outpaces their sinkholes would cause a perfect storm if a majority of people decided to go 'all-in' at any particular point, driving a severe blow to revenue.  They do not want people building a reserve.

Edited by MazingerZ, 13 March 2014 - 04:18 PM.

It's okay to enjoy crap if you're willing to admit it's crap.
Every patch is like ArenaNet walking out onto the stage of the International Don't Kitten Up Championship, and then proceeding to shiv itself in the stomach 30 times while screaming "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD! IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

#22 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4843 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 04:23 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 13 March 2014 - 04:18 PM, said:

Gold generation that outpaces their sinkholes would cause a perfect storm if a majority of people decided to go 'all-in' at any particular point, driving a severe blow to revenue.  They do not want people building a reserve.
Worse, if it happened with a large part of the playerbase, they could not claim that it was an "exploit" and ban everyone for it.

#23 Konzacelt

Konzacelt

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 571 posts
  • Location:a prairie under a clear, blue sky
  • Guild Tag:[PD]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 13 March 2014 - 05:53 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 13 March 2014 - 04:18 PM, said:

It's because at no point do they want their revenue to fluctuate poorly due to an influx of gold that enables people to convert to gems.  Ideally, they want a good portion of the player-base gold-poor so they spend cash.  Gold generation that outpaces their sinkholes would cause a perfect storm if a majority of people decided to go 'all-in' at any particular point, driving a severe blow to revenue.  They do not want people building a reserve.

Hmm, so you're saying the gold-gem conversion apparatus makes this a necessity?  Well that sucks.  Why advertise a game as B2P when the stuff you really need or want takes either eons of game-time to procure, or takes real cash?  Sounds like they just know the gemstore is a better revenue source(when done this way) than a $15 monthly sub, but refrain from admitting it as such because they want GW2 to seem like a better deal.  Thoughts?

#24 Kuskah

Kuskah

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 299 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 06:24 PM

As people mentioned before, to me, grinding means forcing you to do certain repetitive tasks and usually locks away the rest of the game until you complete the tasks, usually in order to artificially extend the play time. Say in an (MMO)RPG you need 1000 XP to level up to LVL2 and enter the next zone but all there's to do is to kill boars, which reward you 1 XP per kill. That's grinding.

On the other hand, farming would be something you want to do, usually in order to gain an advantage in the next portion of the game. Going with the same example, you've leveled up but you keep killing the boars until you're LVL4, so that you'll have an easier time in the next zone and much more resources than the typical player who gets there.

Especially in MMOs, it's hard to define the line between the "acceptable time sink" and grind.

As for GW2, stuff like CoF p1 runs I'd call farming. You do it because you want to, because you want the gold advantage over others. Running Fractals over and over to gain AR in order to be able to survive in higher levels I'd say is grinding. With Acc bound fractal level, you WANT to go lvl 50, but you have no AR, so you NEED TO grind your character up to high enough AR to survive that level.

#25 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4843 posts

Posted 14 March 2014 - 09:07 AM

View PostKonzacelt, on 13 March 2014 - 05:53 PM, said:

Hmm, so you're saying the gold-gem conversion apparatus makes this a necessity?  Well that sucks.  Why advertise a game as B2P when the stuff you really need or want takes either eons of game-time to procure, or takes real cash?  Sounds like they just know the gemstore is a better revenue source(when done this way) than a $15 monthly sub, but refrain from admitting it as such because they want GW2 to seem like a better deal.  Thoughts?
Yes. It's exactly like that.

View PostKuskah, on 13 March 2014 - 06:24 PM, said:

As people mentioned before, to me, grinding means forcing you to do certain repetitive tasks and usually locks away the rest of the game until you complete the tasks, usually in order to artificially extend the play time. Say in an (MMO)RPG you need 1000 XP to level up to LVL2 and enter the next zone but all there's to do is to kill boars, which reward you 1 XP per kill. That's grinding.

On the other hand, farming would be something you want to do, usually in order to gain an advantage in the next portion of the game. Going with the same example, you've leveled up but you keep killing the boars until you're LVL4, so that you'll have an easier time in the next zone and much more resources than the typical player who gets there.

Especially in MMOs, it's hard to define the line between the "acceptable time sink" and grind.

As for GW2, stuff like CoF p1 runs I'd call farming. You do it because you want to, because you want the gold advantage over others. Running Fractals over and over to gain AR in order to be able to survive in higher levels I'd say is grinding. With Acc bound fractal level, you WANT to go lvl 50, but you have no AR, so you NEED TO grind your character up to high enough AR to survive that level.
For some reasons, MMO players accept without thinking that time sinks can be "acceptable". Other games are about experiencing a world or beating a challenge or whatever. Take Gears of War. Action game for the PC and 360. You run around shooting bad dudes in the face. It's hilarious fun. There is nothing in this game that can be described as a "time sink". Even if there are some parts of the game that are a bit boring and you need to beat them to progress to the next more fun part, those parts are there to challenge you, not to simply make you waste your time.
Or take a flight sim. Takeoff is there to "sink time"? Nope. Landing? No. The actual flying part? No!
Super Mario Galaxy. Surely, that game has a lot of time sinks? Hmm. What about classic games? Tetris? Lots of time sinking there, right? Hm. What about Sim City? Gotta wait for all those zones areas to actually become populated!

...hmpf.

But in MMOs, stuff like "oh yeah now you have to kill 100 dudes to unlock the next skill, even though there is literally no reason for us to keep your skills away from you", or "now you have to repeat this dungeon 30 times to get the sword that the end boss have even though he obviously have it every time you are there", or the worst "now you have to kill 100 guys so you can become strong enough to kill the 100 guys in the next zone whom you only kill to become strong enough to repeat the previously mentioned dungeon 30 times" is termed as "acceptable".

It boggles the mind why people "accept" this.

#26 lalangamena

lalangamena

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 180 posts

Posted 14 March 2014 - 09:31 AM

grinding is for numerical points, xp, faction points, achievements, titles etc
farming is for drops and materials; t6 mats etc.

#27 MazingerZ

MazingerZ

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2278 posts
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[CYRL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 14 March 2014 - 03:14 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 14 March 2014 - 09:07 AM, said:

Yes. It's exactly like that.

For some reasons, MMO players accept without thinking that time sinks can be "acceptable". Other games are about experiencing a world or beating a challenge or whatever. Take Gears of War. Action game for the PC and 360. You run around shooting bad dudes in the face. It's hilarious fun. There is nothing in this game that can be described as a "time sink". Even if there are some parts of the game that are a bit boring and you need to beat them to progress to the next more fun part, those parts are there to challenge you, not to simply make you waste your time.
Or take a flight sim. Takeoff is there to "sink time"? Nope. Landing? No. The actual flying part? No!
Super Mario Galaxy. Surely, that game has a lot of time sinks? Hmm. What about classic games? Tetris? Lots of time sinking there, right? Hm. What about Sim City? Gotta wait for all those zones areas to actually become populated!

...hmpf.

But in MMOs, stuff like "oh yeah now you have to kill 100 dudes to unlock the next skill, even though there is literally no reason for us to keep your skills away from you", or "now you have to repeat this dungeon 30 times to get the sword that the end boss have even though he obviously have it every time you are there", or the worst "now you have to kill 100 guys so you can become strong enough to kill the 100 guys in the next zone whom you only kill to become strong enough to repeat the previously mentioned dungeon 30 times" is termed as "acceptable".

It boggles the mind why people "accept" this.

It goes back to a genre that was had to make up its own definition of time, much in the same way D&D did.  D&D progression was all about leveling, but that took a long time and had some RL constraints.  Meeting up, DM prep, etc.

In a computer game, you basically did it whenever (and people did constantly).  There wasn't as much of as skill demand due to constraints at the time.  Latency over 56k modems and early DSL.  PC power.  So you had to simulate combat with the concept of misses, hits, dodges and parries.  The type of stuff that's in WoW's system.  Now we're in the era of Gears of War where 'hit scan' weapons are sharing ground with weapons that obey the concepts of travel time and physics, and the skill ceiling is going up.

The problem is that we haven't reached a point in the iteration of MMOs where we've found adequate mechanisms to extend the experience better obfuscated in game-play.

A lot of single player games have the advantage of doing it better in a linear-ish campaign.  They can put in obstacles that both introduce game mechanics and challenges that leverage those mechanics in order to overcome obstacles that stand in the way of the carrot, which is largely story driven or campaign driven.

But remember that these experiences are designed to run 6-8 hours for the primary campaign like in Gears of War.

RPGs have a different set of carrots involved in leveling up and its a little more... numerically obvious.  But then that's part of the allure of the RPG over the action game.  Its just that good games manage to obfuscate it.
It's okay to enjoy crap if you're willing to admit it's crap.
Every patch is like ArenaNet walking out onto the stage of the International Don't Kitten Up Championship, and then proceeding to shiv itself in the stomach 30 times while screaming "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD! IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

#28 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4843 posts

Posted 14 March 2014 - 03:37 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 14 March 2014 - 03:14 PM, said:

It goes back to a genre that was had to make up its own definition of time, much in the same way D&D did.  D&D progression was all about leveling, but that took a long time and had some RL constraints.  Meeting up, DM prep, etc.

In a computer game, you basically did it whenever (and people did constantly).  There wasn't as much of as skill demand due to constraints at the time.  Latency over 56k modems and early DSL.  PC power.  So you had to simulate combat with the concept of misses, hits, dodges and parries.  The type of stuff that's in WoW's system.  Now we're in the era of Gears of War where 'hit scan' weapons are sharing ground with weapons that obey the concepts of travel time and physics, and the skill ceiling is going up.

The problem is that we haven't reached a point in the iteration of MMOs where we've found adequate mechanisms to extend the experience better obfuscated in game-play.

A lot of single player games have the advantage of doing it better in a linear-ish campaign.  They can put in obstacles that both introduce game mechanics and challenges that leverage those mechanics in order to overcome obstacles that stand in the way of the carrot, which is largely story driven or campaign driven.

But remember that these experiences are designed to run 6-8 hours for the primary campaign like in Gears of War.

RPGs have a different set of carrots involved in leveling up and its a little more... numerically obvious.  But then that's part of the allure of the RPG over the action game.  Its just that good games manage to obfuscate it.
Gygax alluded in an interview that if he made D&D on a computer it wouldn't have levels. Also, the D&D community, at least part of it, is starting to understand that even for tabletop RPGs, levels are a bad thing: http://geek-related....-come-and-gone/
Read it. He presents the problem from a very interesting angle indeed.

Anyway, I tend to agree with you in the big picture, but disagree with you in the details. The GW1 campaign (Prophecies) ran across more hours than 6-8 and if you just stuck to the main story there were very few time sinks. Once you finished that you could choose between glorious PvP and completely optional time sinking that you did just because the game itself is such fun (similar to how a flight sim really is a time sink but you still fly because flying is fun). Making an "infinite" game is possible without stretching the player's time input.

GW1 combat is just as simulated as WoWs is, so the core of the problem does not at all depend on personal skill of combat. The problems are more fundamental: Quest/content structure. Player agency. Reward structure. The very expectations of both players and devs. I don't think that Skyrim or Dark Souls contain any, or at least not anywhere near the amount of time sinks found in MMOs.

#29 MazingerZ

MazingerZ

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2278 posts
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[CYRL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 14 March 2014 - 08:00 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 14 March 2014 - 03:37 PM, said:

Anyway, I tend to agree with you in the big picture, but disagree with you in the details. The GW1 campaign (Prophecies) ran across more hours than 6-8 and if you just stuck to the main story there were very few time sinks. Once you finished that you could choose between glorious PvP and completely optional time sinking that you did just because the game itself is such fun (similar to how a flight sim really is a time sink but you still fly because flying is fun). Making an "infinite" game is possible without stretching the player's time input.

This is why many games that work fine with single-player campaigns get tagged with multi-player (much to their detriment) or collection achievements like 'find all the jars.'  They are there to extend the experience for player and make it seem like "there is more to do."  And for a lot of people, it is.

The thing is, the MMO model is still lurching from the days of EverQuest or DAoC where a game's active development lifetime is years.  But as time has marched on, so to has development time of any software grown larger and larger and more expensive.  Where re-colored skins and simple scripting and harsh polygon terrains were enough, now you have... well, a lot of crap to do to just create a new area.  So they need to give themselves as much time padding as humanly possible.

View PostKonzacelt, on 13 March 2014 - 05:53 PM, said:

Hmm, so you're saying the gold-gem conversion apparatus makes this a necessity?  Well that sucks.  Why advertise a game as B2P when the stuff you really need or want takes either eons of game-time to procure, or takes real cash?  Sounds like they just know the gemstore is a better revenue source(when done this way) than a $15 monthly sub, but refrain from admitting it as such because they want GW2 to seem like a better deal.  Thoughts?

Whether or not that model is necessarily better in terms of return is one thing, its a bunch of factors.  For one, getting people to come back is easier.  Its another reason why a lot of people don't think there's going to be an expansion. The F2P model changeover has shown that it creates healthier numbers in a game to not have a subscription, as it creates a lower barrier to return to the game.  And MMOs thrive on appearing active.  SWTOR lost a lot largely because they rolled out so many servers, population died quickly and they had no transfer service.  These factors are the driving force on guesting in GW2 and CRZ in WoW.
It's okay to enjoy crap if you're willing to admit it's crap.
Every patch is like ArenaNet walking out onto the stage of the International Don't Kitten Up Championship, and then proceeding to shiv itself in the stomach 30 times while screaming "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD! IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

#30 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4843 posts

Posted 15 March 2014 - 09:45 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 14 March 2014 - 08:00 PM, said:

This is why many games that work fine with single-player campaigns get tagged with multi-player (much to their detriment) or collection achievements like 'find all the jars.'  They are there to extend the experience for player and make it seem like "there is more to do."  And for a lot of people, it is.

The thing is, the MMO model is still lurching from the days of EverQuest or DAoC where a game's active development lifetime is years.  But as time has marched on, so to has development time of any software grown larger and larger and more expensive.  Where re-colored skins and simple scripting and harsh polygon terrains were enough, now you have... well, a lot of crap to do to just create a new area.  So they need to give themselves as much time padding as humanly possible.
The time padding excuse, which has been used a lot, is only acceptable if you also accept that time sinks can be called "gameplay". In reality, content is exhausted the first time you get bored of a dungeon. So the real way to increase the time provided by a piece of content is to make gameplay, not the reward, interesting. Of course the reward has a real value to content time as well; it only becomes artificial if the content itself is a time sink. Which it unfortunately often is!

There are people with 500+, 1000+ hours of Skyrim or even Minecraft.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users