However, we made a mistake. A BIG mistake.

Somewhere during the discussions it was strongly recommended that we
streamline our characters.

People wanted something simpler, more direct, more accessible.

We told them. GÇ£If you do this, you will lose all of our subscribers. It is that significant.GÇ¥

The response was that we would gain more due to the marketing push and relaunch.

So, we pushed forward.

I found a blog post written by Dan Rubenfield who was a Lead Game Designer for Star Wars Galaxies during the transition to their New Game Enhancements which is often considered one of the biggest blunders in online gaming history. He wrote an article describing the failure and the lessons to be learned: In Which I Try to Speak Honestly About History. You and the team should read it.



I have been very critical of the planned progression changes for Project Legion, particularly the streamlining of the Skill System and migrating away from EVE's proven and successful system to something more streamlined. I have written a detailed post: To CCP Rouge (An Open Letter). You should read that too.

Please learn from the mistakes of past failures and don't gut the things that make DUST great.

If you're from CCP or CPM, please pass this on to CCP Z. Thanks.

Yes, they should definitely learn from others' mistakes. As for the skill tree, what I heard and saw of it looked anything but streamlined. It looked more complex than the current system. How does it seem to be worse?

Because for example getting an Assault Rifle requires having to going down the Assault tree and unlocking an Assault Suit first.
Add to this an event based progression (kill 50 people with AR to unlock . . . .) Which I also don't like.
Then Suits becoming 'cosmetic', it just takes a lot of the charm of the RPG side.

...The problem with not wanting to punish players for making the wrong decisions is that, without the possibility to make wrong decisions, there's also no way to make right ones since there's no longer an inherent distinction between those two.

If no decision i'm allowed to make can possibly end up being wrong and punishing me, if only by not being as much of an improvement as one of the alternative choices, the inverse is true aswell in that no decision i'm allowed to make can reward me, of only by improving a bit more than the next guy.

What we're left with is an ultimately pointless chain of essentially inconsequential decisions that might aswell not exist at all because they are already designed in such a way as to never negatively impact my performance relative to the immediate alternatives. As such they will only serve as a speed limiter for arbitrarily increasing numbers/added abilities over the course of one's progression and quickly perceived as such by the player, who has no need and therefore no incentive to to actively engage with the system and attempt to make a meaningful, informed decision to begin with...

So a combat rifle will require a combat suit? I'm confused.

Event progression is no big deal I think, as long as it's not the primary mechanic. Having to do actual things could be fun and add some color, but the main means of progressing should still be the player making decisions about where to invest his hard earned SP.

I need to watch his presentation again before I comment further, but this thread is good. This is the kind of feedback we need to give and which they are asking for. They're the experts on making the game but we're the experts on playing it and we can give a lot of constructive feedback. And this is the time to be doing it. Too bad so many are spending all their energy on raging.

http://www.reddit.com/r/evelegion

tell ccp how you feel about legion.

you'll notice this poll is NOT on the dust forums.

in response to your post... they act like most of this couldn't be solved by making gear-specific battles. why is that?

In the roundtable that Zion posted, they actually talk about this very topic/issue, and CCP Z is there for it too. I wouldn't necessarily say it will change anyone's mind, but for those who haven't seen it yet, I definitely recommend watching it.

Skip to about the 40 minute mark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDEA_n_dvlc&noredirect=1

I agree and think that large parts of the new progression concept are horribly misguided from the very ground up.

CCP Z said that he wants meaningful, informed decisions without "punishing" players for their mistakes.

The problem with not wanting to punish players for making the wrong decisions is that, without the possibility to make wrong decisions, there's also no way to make right ones since there's no longer an inherent distinction between those two.

If no decision i'm allowed to make can possibly end up being wrong and punishing me, if only by not being as much of an improvement as one of the alternative choices, the inverse is true aswell in that no decision i'm allowed to make can reward me, of only by improving a bit more than the next guy.

What we're left with is an ultimately pointless chain of essentially inconsequential decisions that might aswell not exist at all because they are already designed in such a way as to never negatively impact my performance relative to the immediate alternatives. As such they will only serve as a speed limiter for arbitrarily increasing numbers/added abilities over the course of one's progression and quickly perceived as such by the player, who has no need and therefore no incentive to to actively engage with the system and attempt to make a meaningful, informed decision to begin with.

TL;DR: There's no reward to a progression that cannot punish. What's left is progression for the sake of it.

How did you type this holding a wine glass, a cane, and a cigar?

I found a blog post written by Dan Rubenfield who was a Lead Game Designer for Star Wars Galaxies during the transition to their New Game Enhancements which is often considered one of the biggest blunders in online gaming history. He wrote an article describing the failure and the lessons to be learned: In Which I Try to Speak Honestly About History. You and the team should read it.



I have been very critical of the planned progression changes for Project Legion, particularly the streamlining of the Skill System and migrating away from EVE's proven and successful system to something more "accessible." I have written a detailed post: To CCP Rouge (An Open Letter). You should read that too.

Please learn from the mistakes of past failures and don't gut the things that make DUST great.

If you're from CCP or CPM, please pass this on to CCP Z. Thanks.

Also, can I say that it was really disquieting to have the "Monetization Director" up on stage talking about how potentially game-breaking changes to the core mechanics of the game were being done to make them more "sexy"?

As a newcomer I was not sure what to pick. It was, you know, fairly difficult for me. So I did like what many people did, I picked [muffled] randomly, you know, depending on the name what I think would be cool, and I made mistakes.

I found a blog post written by Dan Rubenfield who was a Lead Game Designer for Star Wars Galaxies during the transition to their New Game Enhancements which is often considered one of the biggest blunders in online gaming history. He wrote an article describing the failure and the lessons to be learned: In Which I Try to Speak Honestly About History. You and the team should read it.



I have been very critical of the planned progression changes for Project Legion, particularly the streamlining of the Skill System and migrating away from EVE's proven and successful system to something more "accessible." I have written a detailed post: To CCP Rouge (An Open Letter). You should read that too.

Please learn from the mistakes of past failures and don't gut the things that make DUST great.

If you're from CCP or CPM, please pass this on to CCP Z. Thanks.