PDA

View Full Version : MISC. Very Fun and Competitive Game with a Backdraw



smellslikedeo
9th Mar 2014, 15:54
The core gameplay and mechanics make for a very fun and competitive experience. I really enjoyed playing so far.
The balance needs some tweaking here and there, but overall the basics are well done.

The only thing that really leaves a sour taste is the fact that perks and weapons need to be unlocked for quite some gold if you want to use them permanently.
I remember when i played combat arms it was a big letdown having to spend a lot of ingame currency for the usage of weapons etc. Since combat arms used the same "rent" a weapon for X days or get it permantly for a larger amount.
It leaves a sour taste of having to wasted gold on weapons when you dont get them permanently.
Allthough it might not be unbalanced in terms of gameplay it creates an unbalance to what players have instant access to.
So i was thinking about wheter i look forward to unlock some of these cool perks or weapons, or if i rather wanted an even playing field when it comes to choices. As a very competitive person myself i chose the latter.
Allthough the unlockables might be balanced and not overpowered they still create this difference between those who have it and use it on you and those who havent played enough to afford them. It just doesn´t feel right. In that moment you dont think " oh i got outplayed", its rather "he unlocked Perk X which i dont have ". What i want to say, is that i puts focus on what players have and what they dont instead of full focus on gameplay.
Also for testing purposes it feels like you have to waste gold to find " your build". So its bad for experimentation since players rather save gold to permanently unlock stuff instead of trying everything.
At this moment allthough i really like this game so far, keeping this system would probably turn me off in the longrun.
It is very possible to have a f2p system that is purely cosmetic based (dota 2). If players like the game they will buy cosmetics to make them different from the standard players.
As last thought i would rather pay 10-15 euros/dollar for the game when it comes out and have full acces to all weapons and perks for the core experience on equal terms and as extra keep the cosmetic ingame shop with all the nice skins etc.
Having this kind of model would put more focus on the competitive and gameplay aspect of the game which are in my opinion the game´s strenghts!


Summary: Pay for cosmetics ? Yay ! Pay for weapons and perks ? Nay !

RainaAudron
9th Mar 2014, 16:01
Also for testing purposes it feels like you have to waste gold to find " your build".

It leaves a sour taste of having to wasted gold on weapons when you dont get them permanently.

You can always rent items for really cheap, then if you like it you can buy it permanently later. You earn minimum 50 gold for a defeat and just with 5 games you can gather enough for a rent. If you play for a week you can get plenty to buy a permanent one. I think this system is pretty rewarding as you unlock rather than having everything unlocked from start. It gives a sense of accomplishment and progress.

WhiteFlameKyo
9th Mar 2014, 16:19
Also, if not perks, weapons and abilities, what would we spend our gold on?

Normally I don't play multiplayer games (except for local multi) but when I do, I want to feel at least some progress. In Nosgoth I can slowly unlock abilities/weapons and perks one by one. And it will take some time to get them all. Especially if the devs are going to add some new ones from time to time.
So to sum up, I like the current system.

hirukaru
9th Mar 2014, 16:25
Also, if not perks, weapons and abilities, what would we spend our gold on?

Normally I don't play multiplayer games (except for local multi) but when I do, I want to feel at least some progress. In Nosgoth I can slowly unlock abilities/weapons and perks one by one. And it will take some time to get them all. Especially if the devs are going to add some new ones from time to time.
So to sum up, I like the current system.

It is nice to hear that you like the current system.
There will be new items over time to keep the fun but of course these have to be tested re tested and so on.
The basic of gold spending is:
- 1st Weapons/Abilities (you like)
- 1 or 2 perks perm you need
- open up the rest :P

smellslikedeo
9th Mar 2014, 20:25
It gives a sense of accomplishment and progress.
It just a sense of it . The real accomplishment is to get better at the game which is directly rewarded through better play in the actual game. From a causal standpoint i understand that the sense of progress is an okay solution. The becoming better at a game is much more satisfying though than getting Item X unlocked.


From a casual players` point of view i understand this whole system . From a competitive one however, i think it hurts the potential of the game to be fully competitive.

I guess i am one of the dying generation that played for gameplay and not unlocks or rewards.

I spend so much time on multiplayer games be it combat arms, dota 2 ,wc3 ,lol , cs,warhammer, guild wars, with all their different business models and i played many of them in a competitive setting and witnessed first hand how the business models often ruined the competitive aspect of a game that could have been great.

My bottom line still is, as long as there is a shop that directly impacts gameplay it hurts the actual gameplay heavily. And it makes me sad that its the case for this game as i loved its gameplay.

The other question is who plays this game in the long run ? Definetly the ` hardcore` players. So by basic design hurting its competiviness there will not be much of a hardcore competitive scene. Without a hardcore playerbase a game cannot exist for long.

All i am trying is just to give input from a noncasual point of view.


Also, if not perks, weapons and abilities, what would we spend our gold on?

Normally I don't play multiplayer games (except for local multi) but when I do, I want to feel at least some progress. In Nosgoth I can slowly unlock abilities/weapons and perks one by one. And it will take some time to get them all. Especially if the devs are going to add some new ones from time to time.
So to sum up, I like the current system.

There is a lot of things gold could be spent on that doesnt affect gameplay. The joy of unlocking something doesnt last long,where as the joy that lasts is getting better at the game. The whole grinding and unlocking is just something that distracts you from the actual gameplay.


It is nice to hear that you like the current system.
There will be new items over time to keep the fun but of course these have to be tested re tested and so on.


Why are new Items needed to keep the fun ?
We can take lessons from games in the past and from current succesfull games that focus on gameplay instead of unlockables.
And the recent trend goes back to gameplay. Players are getting sick of " call of duty unlock" styled games.
Of course new content is always great. If the content is restricted however its a double edged sword.

This game has such amazing potential for a competitive game.........

WhiteFlameKyo
9th Mar 2014, 21:00
There is a lot of things gold could be spent on that doesnt affect gameplay. The joy of unlocking something doesnt last long,where as the joy that lasts is getting better at the game. The whole grinding and unlocking is just something that distracts you from the actual gameplay.

That's just an addition, a prize if you will, a goal you can look forward to achieve. I already have my favourite weapons and abilities, I don't really need any more than that.


Of course new content is always great. If the content is restricted however its a double edged sword.

And how are they supposed to make money? Skins won't be enough, I'm afraid. Nosgoth, I figure, has/will have a different fanbase than, say, MMO games like Tera, Lineage 2 and so on where cosmetic changes to characters are popular. Vampires won't ever be beautiful, at least without adding "in their own way".
Joking aside, you say that "there is a lot of things gold could be spent on that doesnt affect gameplay". That's true, but if you spend your gold on them, where will money come from? There have to be things available exclusively for money.

MarinePikachu
10th Mar 2014, 01:17
Nobody likes pay to win but this game is sooooooooo far from that view. I mean the base weapons are very good. If someone is using the excuse "that guy just won because of the perks or equipment" then their prob a noob who just can't play and admit the fact that the other team was better.

BTW, I use a lot of the base equipment because it is often times better than the other alternatives. For example scout, I like the base bow because it does good damage, has a good size clip for scout, and does instant damage. Storm might be popular but the thing i dont like about it is its not instant damage. This means that if a vamp starts attacking u head on and is relatively low hp, he may kill you still cuz u used stormbow which will do dmg 2 seconds later. So if you used base bow you would still be alive over storm.

That is just one example. If you have CLEAR examples of many unbalanced equipment then feel free to dispute them here but as far as I can see I do not see this as pay to win.

BTW I might add that I never change my perks since I am too lazy to swap them out. I just use whatever daily gives me. Sounds nooby but I really don't care. In addition I don't want to be reliant on a single perk meaning that in order for me to do well I must have that perk and I still do well in matches.

Stromanous
10th Mar 2014, 07:36
"grinding" only exists if you're not having fun.


The becoming better at a game is much more satisfying though than getting Item X unlocked.

you state this like these things are mutually exclusive.


My bottom line still is, as long as there is a shop that directly impacts gameplay it hurts the actual gameplay heavily. And it makes me sad that its the case for this game as i loved its gameplay.

a 7-day rental costs you 6 losses ( absolute worst case ). how many matches would a hardcore gamer play in a week? let's say 100 matches, & you lose them all. that gives you 5,000 gold just for loser's bonus.

this equates to 15-20 ability rentals, which is far in excess of what you would actually need to play anything. 5,000 gold would also give you 3 permanent weapon unlocks. per week. for a 100% loss rate.

it's a pretty soft gateway to unlock what you need. it will be a completely mute point in the competitive scene. if you have enough time to train to compete with top players, you will naturally have everything you need.

smellslikedeo
10th Mar 2014, 10:22
"grinding" only exists if you're not having fun.

I strongly disagree. Grinding impacts the potential fun you could be having. You will always think about how much more you need to get that juicy new weapon or perk.
I see it as having 50% of the fun and to enjoy the full game i slowly unlock 1% and after a year i reach 100% for the full experience.
It does not mean i cant be having fun with those 50%, but it will always feel lesser.
It surely might be a "soft gateway" especially compared to other games there are. But a gateway is a gateway.
Another thing that we should think about is that if we need those rewards and unlocks to feel progress, and if those said rewards werent in the game , would we still play this game or not? If the answer was no then those rewards will only do for a limited time as the raw gameplay when you reach 100% wont keep you playing. Which then would mean that you would not enjoy the the game for what it is -> the gameplay.
Thats why i was trying to explain that this business model does not put focus on the gameplay of this game.


"If someone is using the excuse "that guy just won because of the perks or equipment" then their prob a noob who just can't play and admit the fact that the other team was better. "

You have to consider all possible scenarios , and those players exist as we call them "casual gamers". Those are the players wanting fake progress unlocks/rewards instead of just getting better as a reward. Most of my casual gamer friends are exactly like that. A casual and hardcore playerbase are both important for a game, but catering to the casuals in form of a business model, does impact the hardcore playerbase.

Renting is a flawed concept even so in real life where its used to milk more out of the customer. It does not satisfy the customer in the long run.
If you really really think about it.... why would you want content to be limited for yourself -> is it really fun for you getting 1 thing unlocked after another?
Do you want your car with 3 wheels? Drive it for a week to get the 4th wheel , drive another week to get lights? This is what this business model does. It takes away from the full and let you have the illusion of getting sth extra while you play. When it is just something you already had but they decided to not let you have it.
I would go as far to say that this business model is outdated and already proven to not be the most succesfull and to not be the best for a game that should have its sole focus on gameplay.
As i said before this game is very very well done besides the flawed business model.

WhiteFlameKyo
10th Mar 2014, 14:30
If you really really think about it.... why would you want content to be limited for yourself -> is it really fun for you getting 1 thing unlocked after another?

Your thinking is one-sided. You think about players' fun, that's alright. However, try thinking about the game's creators. If there's no money, the game will die. And you won't be able to play at all, not only to enjoy it 100% or 50%, like you say.
What do you think should we be available to buy for gold and for money if not classes, weapons, abilities and perks? Only skins? For both gold and money? People would just save their gold to buy them. Skins only for money? What with the gold then?

Ygdrasel
11th Mar 2014, 07:49
I guess i am one of the dying generation that played for gameplay and not unlocks or rewards.

the ` hardcore` players.

hardcore competitive scene.

Without a hardcore playerbase a game cannot exist for long.

noncasual point of view.

Mmm, that's tasty pretention. Please, tell us all more about how you're a part of some dying generation. Good gods, you cannot be serious... :rolleyes:

The only thing that hurts a game is arbitrary hardcore/casual BS invented by elitists with nothing better to do with their time. You're just a gamer like everyone else. As such, you should know how games - all games, with few exceptions - work. The more you play, the better stuff you get.

That's how games work, whether they be multiplayer arenas like Nosgoth or sandboxes like GTA or RPGs. The concept of progression is hardly new to the gaming industry.

And comparing Nosgoth to DOTA 2 is...Ehh. DOTA 2 has far more players and exposure. Just because it survives one way doesn't mean Nosgoth can necessarily do the same. Nosgoth only has two relatively small pools from which it pulls players: LoK fans who were willing to try it and liked it, and people who have no idea what LoK is but needed a multiplayer game. And the latter may leave early.


As for "In that moment you dont think " oh i got outplayed", its rather "he unlocked Perk X which i dont have ". What i want to say, is that i puts focus on what players have and what they dont instead of full focus on gameplay."...That is simply untrue. If I lose to some ability or perk I haven't unlocked yet, it's because I got outplayed. Even the base abilities, played right, can best a perked player with different (possibly better) abilities.

smellslikedeo
11th Mar 2014, 11:50
Just because most games have this kind of progression system doesnt make it the best. The gameplay itself already is heavily inspirated by other games. They took good parts from here and there and put them together. So why not proceed the same way when it comes to the business model?

To be even more honest, it think they need more faith in their own product. I am confident that the game could be succesfull with a different business model. Of course i dont have insight into their finances to see how much they want to make with the game or what they planned it to bring them. Or how much is needed to come out at least even.
f2p = potential larger playerbase = more potential money / i understand why f2p was chosen, dont worry.
I simply fear for the backdraws to be more impactfull than they thought they are. So far i have gotten no usefull answer, unfortuneatly.


And it seems that you guys dont get what my concern is, or are unable to understand it.

As for the quote about getting outplayed. I was simply creating a scenario that will happen for some players. It was not about how it actually is. I put myself into different point of views so i can understand others.


As for my tasty pretention you might want to prove a counterpoint so i can wake up from my illusion, but it would require you to spend actual time on thinking, which is not that popular nowadays.
While you are busy thinking , you can also consider thinking about if everything should be taken literal or if just maybe sometimes its more about the deeper meaning.