Everything else sucks compared to AE farming

[jubakumbi]

19 minutes ago, Marine X said:

I play mostly Solo, and usually don't get great rewards, but I get punched in the face a lot with no long term repercussions, SWEET!

I know a few poeple that would pay money to get punched in the ... wait, that's different...

[oxmox]

1 hour ago, swordchucks said:

So... activity X should give twice the rewards of other activities because... the people that do it want more rewards?  And everyone else should get half those rewards because they... wouldn't want more rewards?  I'm not entirely sure how that argument works.

Yes.

 

Late stage MMOs like CoH face a difficult issue in that they need to court multiple player types at the same time. For vets who want to play with builds, tons of money earned quick is great, it lets them do partake in the main reason they're still playing a 15 year old game.

 

There are also newer players (or returning players trying to relive their old experiences) who prefer the normal pacing of the economy. Getting money to equip sets is another progression system just like xp. Managing it and getting enough to buy the next set of item is fun for a lot of people. There's a reason almost every rpg has some sort of economic system and almost none of them just give you infinite money right off the bat.

 

Optional farming lets both groups be happy.

[The_Cheeseman]

Well, if all you care about is maxing out your levels as efficiently as possible, sure, go farm in AE. But you won't be earning any badges, or merits, or getting experience with how your character performs in disparate situations and against various enemy groups, etc.

Personally, I can't enjoy a character that has been power-levelled or farmed up to max. I enjoy feeling how the performance of my character evolves and changes as I gradually add more powers, new sets, and try tougher content. I want to be challenged. I often design characters with intentional disadvantages or flaws just because I want to see how I can play around them and still succeed. I enjoy novel experiences, which is why I enjoy the huge variety of builds possible in CoX. If I gain like 30 levels in one sitting, I tend to lose my feeling of connection or investment with that character, and usually end up dropping it.

Bottom line, no, all content other than AE farming doesn't "suck". The goal of playing CoX isn't necessarily to get a character maxed-out as quickly and efficiently as possible. Some builds will be most fun in certain level ranges, but not particularly remarkable at 50. You don't need to be 50 to do fun, challenging content or reap valuable rewards. There really isn't much vertical progression in the game, so it's kinda pointless rushing to max, when there's really nothing left to do at that point than go back and experience all the content you skipped by AE farming in the first place.

*EDIT*

That being said, I have no problem with people who want to farm AE to advance their characters faster. I worry that such a mindset will hinder their overall enjoyment of the game, but we're all adults here and can make our own decisions about how to spend our free time. I have had no issues leveling and IOing my characters having never set foot inside AE, so it's no concern of mine how they choose to progress. This isn't a competitive game, and there will always be some form of first order optimal strategy for efficient progression, so nerfing AE is pointless. Fire farmers aren't bothering anybody, so let them do what they want.

Edited September 25, 2019 by The_Cheeseman

[Crysis]

11 hours ago, AkuTenshiiZero said:

Imagine kids today actually playing a game for the sake of playing it, and not because some glittery meme-laden bullhorn shouting "epic lootz" and shotgun blasting colorful boxes in their face every time they take a step.

....thus sayeth every Boomer in the USofA about anyone younger than them.

 

Just because you don’t enjoy the meme-laden bullhorn’s doesn’t mean the next generation doesn’t expect it.  

[DR_Mechano]

13 minutes ago, Crysis said:

....thus sayeth every Boomer in the USofA about anyone younger than them.

 

Just because you don’t enjoy the meme-laden bullhorn’s doesn’t mean the next generation doesn’t expect it.  

Judging by the visceral reaction to Battlefront 2 I don't think a lot of people enjoy lootboxes...

[VV]

If you want to powerlevel, you get what you deserve.

[pattycake]

Nerfing AE is not good, punishing farmers isn’t a good solution, and ramping rewards for non-farming I can foresee it will ruin the fun for their play style, and saturate the market. The idea to become rich is a motivator for some people, not for me; I find it boring, I shan’t stumping on what others enjoy. IMO, there should be specific resources that compliment each players playstyle.

 

If you want to be rich and powerful and not want to reroll every character, farming is your game.

 

if you enjoy PvP, and you want PvP IO’s you should be doing PvP related activities and progress; there isn’t.

 

if you’re a community person and want to efficiently gain prestige, you should only gain prestige by playing with SG/coalition; there isn’t, tbf prestige was removed and it’s awesome, but I kind of miss building a base from earned currency.

 

there should be a specific reward for everyone to look forward to regarding on the activities you participate in.

 

 I’m sorry IMO, Farmers and crafters have the most features out of any other kind of individual, and being told not to use it isn’t exactly fair. If it was your playstyle that lacked features and mechanics you’d feel robbed too.

 

I have a lot of respect for the farming community, even though it doesn’t interest me, and it’s tempting to use cause it’s efficient, it’s also the only aspect relating to progressive mechanics which reward a specific type of playstyle.

 

costume contests are funded by farmers.

 

My closing thoughts, I will not stop advocating for every single community no matter how big or small, and game design is complicated, everything impacts, planned ideas can fail just as easy as accidental features becoming hugely incentivized upon. 

 

If HC becomes legit, I really hope they have better plans than nerfing or catering to farmers.

 

[MunkiLord]

2 hours ago, VV said:

If you want to powerlevel, you get what you deserve.

Lots of XP, levels, influence, and drops?

[Lines]

I don’t think there’s any solid reason to change what AE does, but I disagree with OP and a few others that the rest of the game needs to be accelerated to match it. (Edit: reread and realised OP wasn’t actually saying this directly. Sorry to misrepresent)

 

XP in normal content is only bad in relation to AE farming, but in of itself the pace of the game is great. I’ve been playing with dxp, but might drop to 1.5x or 1.75x just to pace things better.

 

Maximising efficiency isn’t the same thing as playing the game to me. I’m in no rush to create level 50 characters; the game starts at level 1 for me. I don’t feel like I should be earning something for every minute that I play. I enjoy traversing the city, it’s part of the game and I don’t want missions to be delivered to me at the snap of my fingers. Heck, I even enjoy Oranbega and the Shadow Shards and I hold an issue with some of the ‘QOL’ travel options, which water down the immersion to me*. I much prefer to do contacts when they’re available at my level rather than through Ouroboros.

 

AE is a great option for those who play the game for the high end content, but don’t keep taking the game away from those of us who want the slower pace, immersion and adversity (what little of it is left). What would be the point of this wonderfully detailed world if we’re encouraged to avoid it?

 

 

*I’m talking about the TUNNEL network giving access to Firebase Zulu. Portal corps has an enormous, clearly expensive and insanely high-tech portal in their headquarters, with sandbags and 

watchtowers ready to stop Rularuu invasion forces. One day some jesters turn up like ‘plop’ here’s a piddly little yellow thing in the centre of populated areas that does the same job.

 

It bothers me greatly.

Edited September 26, 2019 by Lines

[Haijinx]

22 hours ago, cejmp said:

Thats an artifact of the original risk reward concepts that has been pushed to limits not foreseen during OG roll out. They never quite got it through their heads that players will seek the path of least resistance every time.

On every game ever, lol

[Haijinx]

Im currently soloing a scrapper through all the arcs, starting with Pretoria.  I found I was leveling too fast.

 

I ran through the crusader resistance arcs then had to go ouro to pick up the others.  Just completed the level 10 ones.   

 

Im level 27 already.  

 

This game definitely does not level too slow.   

 

 

 

 

[Clave Dark 5]

22 hours ago, cejmp said:

They never quite got it through their heads that players will seek the path of least resistance every time.

This is why they nerfed AE exploits?  Maybe they were bad at predicting just how extreme the players might go for it, but...

[Crysis]

6 hours ago, DR_Mechano said:

Judging by the visceral reaction to Battlefront 2 I don't think a lot of people enjoy lootboxes...

While I was being cheeky, my point is that while “everyone” seems to despise the notion of loot boxes, many of the top rated games on MOBILE are solidly built around this business model.  And PC gaming, while still strong, isn’t the only type of gaming in town versus console and mobile/tablet gaming.  Tencent, a name you’ll likely recognize from the mobile market, had over $7.6B in sales in 2017 and is buying up PC game companies (Blizzard, Activision, etc) and thus controls their revenue models.  That’s one company holding almost 10% market share of the entire market.

 

Even COH dabbled in loot boxes during Live via Hero packs.  Not exactly the same thing, but for the time, there were entire tomes of FUD being written on Live forums about how they’d ruin the game.

 

Good source of data:  https://www.wepc.com/news/video-game-statistics/

 

 

[jubakumbi]

2 hours ago, Crysis said:

While I was being cheeky, my point is that while “everyone” seems to despise the notion of loot boxes, many of the top rated games on MOBILE are solidly built around this business model.  And PC gaming, while still strong, isn’t the only type of gaming in town versus console and mobile/tablet gaming.  Tencent, a name you’ll likely recognize from the mobile market, had over $7.6B in sales in 2017 and is buying up PC game companies (Blizzard, Activision, etc) and thus controls their revenue models.  That’s one company holding almost 10% market share of the entire market.

 

Even COH dabbled in loot boxes during Live via Hero packs.  Not exactly the same thing, but for the time, there were entire tomes of FUD being written on Live forums about how they’d ruin the game.

 

Good source of data:  https://www.wepc.com/news/video-game-statistics/

I love loot boxes.

Love, love them.

IMO, it's the perfect vehicle to fund a game.

If you don't have cash, play and grind because you probably have the time.

If you have the cash, buy what you like, spend the amount of money on the game you prefer.

Everyone wins.

 

Now, what people don't really like about this is mainly three things, IME.

First, it seems no one likes there to be anything in the loot boxes that cannot be acquired in the game through play. I generally agree. If the game has a market where those things can be traded like STO, then maybe. That is the implementation, not the loot box funding system. Like Battlefront screwed the pooch.

Second, IME, boils down to people that simply hate the idea someone can use real money to get something in the game and that they cannot. Plain old envy.

Third, 'the children'. Everyone loses thier minds over kids spending money on stuff, games, asking Elexa, whatever. Comics were evil, no it's loot boxes. 

 

When I could not afford things, I did not tear down people who could, nor did I demand the car I wanted be listed at a lower price.

Now that I can afford things, I spend my cash on games so game makers can make more games.

My wife and I never had kids, never wanted them, not really interested in restricting my options and freedoms any more than I do already in life over other peoples kids, personal respocibility, etc. 

 

For a lot of people, loot boxes make games more accessible because they allow the overall game to be free, while allowing cash to flow in when people want to spend it.

CoH was one of, if not the first MMO, to impement them, loved 'em then, love 'em now.

[Myrmidon]

All they have to do is make AE give no rewards outside of Dev’s Choice missions and your problem is solved.

[DSorrow]

2 minutes ago, jubakumbi said:

Now, what people don't really like about this is mainly three things, IME.

First, it seems no one likes there to be anything in the loot boxes that cannot be acquired in the game through play. I generally agree. If the game has a market where those things can be traded like STO, then maybe. That is the implementation, not the loot box funding system. Like Battlefront screwed the pooch.

Second, IME, boils down to people that simply hate the idea someone can use real money to get something in the game and that they cannot. Plain old envy.

Third, 'the children'. Everyone loses thier minds over kids spending money on stuff, games, asking Elexa, whatever. Comics were evil, no it's loot boxes. 

There are two things I hate about loot boxes:

1. contents that provide a meaningful gameplay benefit (or any benefit at all in PvP games) because that's just P2W
2. random contents because that means I can't decide what I get with my money

If either of those things is true, then in my opinion the loot box design is terrible. I strongly prefer everything being achievable through gameplay, but I don't think it's necessarily unacceptable if some cosmetic items are only available through microtransactions. A lot depends on the context of the game, the amount of things only available via credit card, how much they cost and so on.

 

I have never bought a gamble loot box with real money and I never will.

[jubakumbi]

2 minutes ago, DSorrow said:

There are two things I hate about loot boxes:

1. contents that provide a meaningful gameplay benefit (or any benefit at all in PvP games) because that's just P2W
2. random contents because that means I can't decide what I get with my money

If either of those things is true, then in my opinion the loot box design is terrible. I strongly prefer everything being achievable through gameplay, but I don't think it's necessarily unacceptable if some cosmetic items are only available through microtransactions. A lot depends on the context of the game, the amount of things only available via credit card, how much they cost and so on.

 

I have never bought a gamble loot box with real money and I never will.

Great, you vote with your wallet!

You point out the implementation is key, just like ALL the other game systems added to a product.

P2W is a bad implmentation when PvP is involved, I agree.

 

I totally agree everything should be available through gameplay.

 

Yet you state that even if all these requirements were met to your satisfaction, you would never buy one.

Why?

If it was done the way you like, no P2W, just cosmetics that could also be gained through play, where is it bad now?

[DR_Mechano]

1 minute ago, jubakumbi said:

Great, you vote with your wallet!

You point out the implementation is key, just like ALL the other game systems added to a product.

P2W is a bad implmentation when PvP is involved, I agree.

 

I totally agree everything should be available through gameplay.

 

Yet you state that even if all these requirements were met to your satisfaction, you would never buy one.

Why?

If it was done the way you like, no P2W, just cosmetics that could also be gained through play, where is it bad now?

The problem I had with lootboxes is that they changed how games did microtransactions.

 

Say a new ship comes out in STO, you can't directly buy that ship anymore like you could before lootboxes were a thing. Instead you've got to buy a lootbox HOPING it has a (usually very small) chance of containing the ship you want. So if there is an item you really want you're going to end up spending more in lootboxes trying to get said item than you would have spent just buying the item when it first came out in the old fashioned way of doing things.

 

Oh, but the devs cry, you get all the stuff in those lootboxes while also trying to get the thing you want which is value for money. It's not if I don't CARE about the rest of the stuff in the lootboxes and literally only want that one thing. I don't care if I get a double XP booster or some decals if the only thing I want is that item since all the rest is just fluff used to pad out lootboxes to make it seem like you're getting something of value.

[DSorrow]

3 minutes ago, jubakumbi said:

Yet you state that even if all these requirements were met to your satisfaction, you would never buy one.

Why?

I'll never buy a gamble loot box. If the contents are random, I'm not going to pay because I want to decide what my money gets me. In an ideal situation where the item in question is only cosmetic, I really like it, it doesn't cost too much and the pool of items only available via credit card is small, I would probably buy it. I have bought cosmetic items in games before so it's not out of the question I would do it again, but the implementation is key and the only two hard rules I have are the ones I mentioned, rest is case by case.

[pattycake]

Loot boxing was originally successful by steam Valves CSGO, and players had freedom to sell anything they had unboxed, granting value, rarity, excitement.. gambling, regulations.. EU

 

lootboxing can eventually turn into predatory practices, for the greedy companies which ring the cloth under a tap.

 

lootboxing, IMO, works best with value

[jubakumbi]

3 minutes ago, DR_Mechano said:

The problem I had with lootboxes is that they changed how games did microtransactions.

 

Say a new ship comes out in STO, you can't directly buy that ship anymore like you could before lootboxes were a thing. Instead you've got to buy a lootbox HOPING it has a (usually very small) chance of containing the ship you want. So if there is an item you really want you're going to end up spending more in lootboxes trying to get said item than you would have spent just buying the item when it first came out in the old fashioned way of doing things.

 

Oh, but the devs cry, you get all the stuff in those lootboxes while also trying to get the thing you want which is value for money. It's not if I don't CARE about the rest of the stuff in the lootboxes and literally only want that one thing. I don't care if I get a double XP booster or some decals if the only thing I want is that item since all the rest is just fluff used to pad out lootboxes to make it seem like you're getting something of value.

 

2 minutes ago, DSorrow said:

I'll never buy a gamble loot box. If the contents are random, I'm not going to pay because I want to decide what my money gets me. In an ideal situation where the item in question is only cosmetic, I really like it, it doesn't cost too much and the pool of items only available via credit card is small, I would probably buy it. I have bought cosmetic items in games before so it's not out of the question I would do it again, but the implementation is key and the only two hard rules I have are the ones I mentioned, rest is case by case.

 

Just to be clear here.

Both of the things you two point out are preferences on implementation, not actual arguments against the idea, IMO.

 

Now, the moment we get to the meat of it, 'gamble boxes', we can have a conversation.

 

IMO, it is the dislike of the random idea at it's base, that you spend money and only have a chance to get the thing you want.

You like to apply your resources directly, without some system in the middle shorting the 'investment' you make.

Totally fair PoV.

Some poeple don't even want clamps on ToHit and Defence - if they have 100% to hit, they expect to hit every time.

 

Personally, the loot boxes are just like collectable card games to me.

The randomness is part of the fun for me.

 

So IMO, provided there is a market/player trading, I can 'gamble' all I want and then you can 'buy' what come out of my boxes when I sell the things I don't want, at a price point that is typically at least know, even if not stable.

Again, how is this system bad?

Everyone gets what they want, right?

 

IME, the implication is that many gamers are simply 'used to' the traditional idea of one price = the whole game.

Value IMO is a whole other can of worms.

If I value my game time, if it brings me joy, then giving the game company money brings me more joy.

If I don't like the value prop of the game, if the game does not bring me joy, then no, I don't spend money.

That does not negate the loot box revenue stream, that just means some poeple like different games.

[DR_Mechano]

Or if they offer the thing for sale directly in a cash shop and only that thing but also offer it in lootboxes with a 'chance' of getting it cheaper but also containing lots of stuff I personally don't care about but might be useful to people then I think that would be the best option. Those that are prone to gamble can do it through lootboxes while the rest of us can buy that item without the high chance of overspending just to get something we want.

[swordchucks]

35 minutes ago, Myrmidon said:

All they have to do is make AE give no rewards outside of Dev’s Choice missions and your problem is solved.

While that would certain "fix" things, that's not at all what I would want to see happen. 

 

You could cut the inf gain of AE missions in half and it would still be the most profitable activity you could engage in in-game (and would still provide all the same supply boosts since I'm not advocating for a reduction in those). 

 

I'm not arguing that it shouldn't be a rewarding activity.  I'm arguing that it shouldn't give rewards dramatically out of line with every other activity out there.  Keep in mind that we just had a big deal made of fixing Hami raids and the very worst of the abusers were still earning less reward than a good farmer can reliably pull in.

[DSorrow]

8 minutes ago, jubakumbi said:

If I value my game time, if it brings me joy, then giving the game company money brings me more joy.

If I don't like the value prop of the game, if the game does not bring me joy, then no, I don't spend money.

That does not negate the loot box revenue stream, that just means some poeple like different games.

I don't think by any means that microtransactions aren't a valid way of collecting revenue, I just dislike gambling because the randomness only decreases the value for me. To give an arbitrary example, if it takes on average 5 rolls to get something, then for me getting it by roll 4 is a much smaller positive than getting it by roll 6 is negative, so on average I'll be pretty pissed off after gambling. It doesn't matter quite as much if we're using play money, but I still prefer being able to directly buy what I want because I find unlucky RNG streaks extremely frustrating.

[jubakumbi]

7 minutes ago, ToZ said:

Loot boxing was originally successful by steam Valves CSGO, and players had freedom to sell anything they had unboxed, granting value, rarity, excitement.. gambling, regulations.. EU

 

lootboxing can eventually turn into predatory practices, for the greedy companies which ring the cloth under a tap.

 

lootboxing, IMO, works best with value

Totally in agreement that implementation is key.

Totally agree compnaies can get stupid and predatory with it, just like with anything else.

 

The main argument to replace them seems to a subscribtion model.

$15/month USD is a lot of money to some people on this planet.

Allowing subscribers more perks than non-subscribers, playing the same game on the same servers, is, IMO, a worse implementaion, it directly creates haves and have-nots.

The whole idea promotes first and second class citizens in the game, a terrible thing IMO, every implmetation I have seen pits the subs against the non-subs.