|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 28 post(s) |
Fenix Alexarr
BurgezzE.T.F
General Tso's Alliance
108
   |
Posted - 2014.05.14 23:53:00 -
[1] - Quote
Welcome to the forums Z.
Your presentation on changing the skill system in Dust actually made my head spin (in a horrible way) when I saw it at work. I have also seen a lot of feedback about keeping the current skill system. 5 lvls, SP, ISIS type trees... I'm wondering how many people who play aren't here to tell you what a poor decision it would be to gut the current skill system.
The general sentiment I've read throughout the forums has been disbelief that the current system would change so radically, because it would make no sense to the players that have invested time/energy/dollars/isk/blood/sweat/tears/hardware into a game that stands heads and shoulders above other games as a direct result of the skill progression system.
I don't mind the presentation of the new 'suggested trees'. Those are useful and most games have similar things (RIFT comes to mind immediately) The problem that I have with your new system is that it would effectively turn Dust/Legion into all of the other shooters out there that rise and fall in popularity by locking items behind a common archetype layout.
I realize COD and BFx have a formula that makes them money. They ride the waves of popularity and invest quite heavily in hooking players on a system that is constantly changing and forcing people to restart the grind every release (new game). Dust/Legion cannot survive their model of progression. We need the current system to stay mostly in tact if we are to hold the attention of players for more than a few months (see tribes:ascension).
Our waves of popularity come from rebalances (iterations on expansions). We don't have a new iteration of a game where skills/gear/ranks get reset every few months. Leaving the ability to skill into something totally off the wall from the normal archetypes in FPS games is literally the strongest pull for new players to Dust.
Taking that away removes any incentive to cope with the other constant issues that this development studio has with building their first shooter. Please reconsider your position. I see it as a very vocal minority that is causing you to push for this simplification. Your long term players will not stick around for a game like you propose when there are so many direct alternatives that have piles of polish on them.
The optimal solution I see is that your new progression trees become polite suggestions and that the gear/skill progression remains almost exactly the same. Use this time to improve the NPE to make sure that all players start out with the same basic knowledge to most effectively use the tools you're giving them.
Anything short of that will probably not help the current situation with regards to players confidence in Legion as a long-term investment. |
Fenix Alexarr
BurgezzE.T.F
General Tso's Alliance
111
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 03:43:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Z wrote:Ulysses Knapse wrote:I strongly suggest that EVE: Legion adopt a progression system that mirrors EVE Online. I don't see why not. And I am strongly working doing the opposite for the reasons stated 20 times in this thread :)
This is the specific point everyone is talking about. This is the crux of the problem. Please address this. |
Fenix Alexarr
BurgezzE.T.F
General Tso's Alliance
115
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 05:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
ANON Cerberus wrote:Vell0cet wrote:CCP Z wrote:I donGÇÖt necessarily agree here. Money spent and team size are not the only factors. Innovation and user experience are what we are aiming for. Create a different game (sandbox Wild PVE/PVP) with a polished experience (more accessible, better UI, better immersion) will make us successful Thanks again for taking the time to reply. I know you're busy and having the respect for your players to address us directly is really awesome. If I were running a smaller gaming studio trying to compete directly with powerhouses in my industry, I would be looking to find the existing competitive advantages of my team and product and build on those. The reality is you can't beat those studios on accessibility, polish, immersion, or PvE (they have huge campaigns with tons of scripted content and story lines). You're 100% right about the sandbox though. That and the depth of your skills and fittings along with the sense of loss that forces you to play your character like their life has value are the things that make your product so incredible (your artists are pretty amazing too). I can assure you that we all want the player base to increase massively from what it is now. I believe there is a viable market for a better version of what DUST was supposed to be. I know there are a lot of players like myself who find most FPS games shallow and boring. Many of us are older, with limited free time and deeper pockets. I have to believe there is a way to tap into that market somehow and make a financially successful product. It's hard to believe that building/refining/improving on the successes of DUST isn't a better direction than gutting so much of it (the progression system) and starting from scratch. Would you at least consider an ISIS-like overlay over the existing EVE-style system as an alternative? Continue work on your proposals, but simultaneously explore alternatives? I completely agree that the game needs to be accessible to as wide an audience as possible. I really don't understand why UI/UX improvements and a AAA tutorial can't bring accessibility to an improved version of the existing system. As someone who has studied UI design, one point that was repeatedly hammered into my brain was how critical the first launch experience is of a piece of software. I think you should get the tutorial team together and have them play a couple hours of Portal 1 (better yet, have the team watch someone who has never played it and take notes). That game did an absolutely amazing job of introducing players to foreign concepts, but it had personality, humor and flair that kept driving it forward. I think there's a lot you guys could take away from that game. The first Halo did an awesome job of this as well. It introduced radical concepts like the shield regeneration system but in a tutorial that got right into the action from the beginning. You go from a boring scene in a lab to having aliens board your ship with the power going out and fires everywhere. Now that's a way to grab a prospective customer and suck them in! Quote:Quote: Your concern that EVE is a different financial model is a bit misguided. EVE is free-to-play as well with the PLEX system. Why canGÇÖt we reduce the amount of unboosted passive and active SP gained by some percentage (maybe 30% or so) and increase the percentage of boosters by the same amount to make them a better value and more desirable? If we can buy/sell boosters on the market like PLEX then the systems will be very similar. Players can grind ISK to gain access to boosters, and players with more real money than time can sell them boosters for ISK. I have not presented the new Monetization system for Legion. We will be very far away from what DUST currently is (no gear/items for AURUM, players who donGÇÖt want to spend money will still have access to all GÇ£paidGÇ¥optionsGǪ). I will create a separate thread when I am ready to have this discussion Again, as I said in the presentation and in this thread: the level of customization remains the same as in DUST, we are changing the way it is presented to all players. It sounds like you guys are way below your targets financially, and I can appreciate the difficulty this puts you in. You have access to the numbers and we obviously don't, so it's really hard to give feedback here. All I can say is that the existing model got me to spend more on DUST than any video game in my life (hell I bought a PS3 just to play DUST). I bought BPOs (including the DREN set and the Collector's Edition), as well as boosters (a bunch of Omegas). I never used an AUR suit (that wasn't a BPO) and was planning to sell the ones I got from the freebies, events, and thrown in with the BPO packs on the market once that came out. One of the big problems with AUR gear is that it's a bit like having the word "douchebag" tattooed onto your suit. For some reason, paying money for boosters and selling them in the market for ISK to buy normal suits doesn't feel as sleazy as using a 'I paid real money for this suit' Proto Amarr Assault Suit. Paying money shouldn't broadcast to other players that you've paid money like the naming of AUR gear does. Hopefully that's valuable feedback. I have to echo this post, he said everything I wanted to said. I get the feeling that most of the community will feel a similar way. Have the CPM anything to say on this subject?
The CPM have spoken on this. They've advised CCP that the direction they are heading is wrong. They have been ignored. I'm hoping that with the amount of feedback on this thread, we can finally have the people in charge start to see what the problem is with these proposed changes. |
Fenix Alexarr
BurgezzE.T.F
General Tso's Alliance
116
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 08:04:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Saberwing wrote:Ulysses Knapse wrote:
Don't try to defend CCP Z, or we may start disliking you, too.
 His post was effectively made up of factual statements. And regardless, he's entitled to defend whomever he wants. PS. I <3 CCP Z
and props to you devs. The odd hours that are going on in this thread...
That all being said, we know that you are wanting to get away from the current system. We're telling you as respectfully as possible that this new way of progressing through a game isn't new. It's been tried and true in games that are not in line with what CCP has stated as their long term goals.
Listen to us or don't. We're all just spouting opinions and defending ideas that may not ever see the light of day... This entire thread has been nothing but talking about how SP and 5 levels of skills is beneficial to the game as a whole when stacked up against games like COD and BFx.
Fix the NPE and the bonuses associated with the current skilling and item system and you will have a recipe for success on the the PC. If that's all you take from this, the game will be far better off for it.
It's not like we're trying to attack Z personally. It's this idea that Eve/Dust is doing it so wrong that most people here are attacking. On the list of things that need fixed for a PC release, that is literally at the bottom of the list. Focus on providing a better wrapper for this candy of a skill system and you will have more, longer-term players flock to you than you know what to do with. |
Fenix Alexarr
BurgezzE.T.F
General Tso's Alliance
120
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 06:21:00 -
[5] - Quote
Is anyone almost entirely on board with Z's proposed changes? (like >90%) From what I'm reading here the proposed solution needs to be scraped. There's no shame in that, devs. I'd rather get it right than have it wrong when you have the opportunity to basically start from scratch.
That being said, if you really are looking to actually use feedback from the players and this isn't just an "FYI" session, thank you. This is the kind of thing Dust has needed sorely for a long time. I only want to stress (again) that it's okay to scrap this new system altogether and start fresh. I'm a developer by trade and I will trash an idea (no matter how heavily invested I am in a solution) if it isn't the absolute best solution at its core for the product.
Requirements gathering is hard, but thank you guys for putting real effort into it. |
Fenix Alexarr
BurgezzE.T.F
General Tso's Alliance
120
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 06:24:00 -
[6] - Quote
ANON Cerberus wrote:At this point, we need to actually see a diagram or some sort of depiction of this new progression system. It might not be as bad as it sounds however its hard to visualise at this point.
The main thing I keep seeing on the forums is - people DO NOT want to be forced into specific roles and we certainly do not want any dumbing down / being pigeon holed into role X role Y role Z.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnsLCz10CVU&index=31&list=PLldrBIEnJ5hMIXwk_e8-VZb0EldJqXmg_
relevant link. |
Fenix Alexarr
BurgezzE.T.F
General Tso's Alliance
123
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 14:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Logibro wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:CCP Z wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Feedback on Progression I like a lot the sidegrades idea and that is something that our Design Team is currently looking at (more or less modules, different weapon types, different abilities like being able to hack or not ...) At Fanfest you mentioned after the race choice in the skill tree there are these specializations. Can you give any examples or details about these specializations? If the commando doesn't make it into Legion, can there be an assault specialization with 2 light weapons? possibly at the cost of something else. Also, can you share some monetization ideas? The current default Assault has two light weapons. Commandos haven't really been worked on yet, but if they stick around it's likely they'll have a new role.
Please don't tie weapons to suits :(
Is there any reason they MUST be tied to suits? |
Fenix Alexarr
BurgezzE.T.F
General Tso's Alliance
124
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 14:40:00 -
[8] - Quote
Quote:" Negative Respec/Skillback idea"
I love it. That is really the kind of thing I will be looking at for our respec system
A lot of people are expressing what a terrible idea the respec is and what it means for the credibility of the system. I personally don't like the idea of removing consequences from choices for such a small cost.
Quote:"ISIS UI Discussion"
100% agreed here again, ISIS is the basis of our thinking. I will share the mockups with you when they are ready
If the progression system is linear, why on Earth would anyone need an ISIS-style layout for gear?
Quote: "Will new players be able to see a noticeable improvement in their abilities as they apply their skill points early in their career?"
Yes, but mostly they will unlock new items
mostly? I suppose we need more concrete details, but this system you're describing mirrors Hawken/Mech Warrior Online almost identically. That isn't a good thing.
Quote:"Are you simply collapsing 5 level skills into single nodes? Are you taking a lot of small rewarding steps and replacing them with a few huge daunting steps? Am I going to have to grind for two weeks to get 25% PG from the Engineering node when I only need 5% more PG to make my fit work?"
We are basically creating 5 nodes level 1 instead of 1 node with 5 levels. It helps people understand and allow our trees to be more linear
This is one thing specifically that many people are complaining about. It effectively removes skills from the game since incremental improvements come only in the (quite limited) form of new gear.
Quote:"How is restricting players for newcomers and/or idiots a better idea than keeping everything free and explaining it all?"
Less frustration leads to better engagement. When a system is way too complex and obscure, you have 2 solution: explain it better, make it simpler. Both solutions are not exclusive, and thatGÇÖs what we are shooting for.
Again remember, as CCP_ROUGE stated it during the Keynote, Legion is a prototype, Legion is NOT Dust514, even if they share the same DNA. We have to make drastic changes to make Legion first green lit and then successful. Progression seems to be one of them.
If you look at the ecosystem he talked about: Player driven economy, sandbox MMO, Immersive experience, the new Progression System we are working on makes a lot more sense.
Fine, I understand your motivation. But in this process of 'making it simpler' you're removing what distinguishes dust/legion from other games. It removes my incentive to play entirely since I can go to other, more polished games that have little to no problems.
"I am going through all the replies here and will make sure the feedback will help us improve our current design"
Again, thank you for this effort.
|
Fenix Alexarr
BurgezzE.T.F
General Tso's Alliance
127
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 20:03:00 -
[9] - Quote
Cyrius Li-Moody wrote:Days later and I still don't like the concept of this proposed progression system for pretty much every reason people have posted. I'm definitely getting the classic CCP Dust Development vibe of "we're going to do what we want on this with the illusion of feedback."
The current skill system we have works to a certain extent but has it's obvious problems. 1/3/5 is bad. Items should be unlocked at 1 and every point after should provide a bonus. Why is this difficult?
The idea that "there's too much choice" is simply silly. Yes, at first there is a bit too much choice but this can be remedied by a certification system similar to eve's. It can give you an idea of a "vanilla" role and you can go from there.
You guys seem so ridiculously deadset on the idea that your players are idiots and it's insulting. Part of the biggest problem of NPE is that they don't know where to put their SP to make a decent build and also that weapons are incredibly imbalanced.
We want depth and customization, not progression on rails until you hit end game. Stop trying to reinvent the progression and just fix the problems the current system has and make sure weapons and suits are balanced properly.
I didn't want to sound this harsh, but you've hit the nail on the head. I was hoping this wasn't an 'FYI feedback' thread. But more and more, I think the Devs are so set on this rotten core of a system that there's no chance of avoiding this train wreck. Others might buy into this new system. I won't. |
|
|
| |
|