What play styles should the Dev team support: solo, teams, story, powerleveling, etc

[DougGraves]

This question is not simply what do players like to do in CoX.  It is what should the devs devote time to and what should the devs adjust the game for everyone to achieve.  

 

Playstyles I can think of (whether or not the dev should support them): solo, small teams, large teams, raids, playing stories, creating stories, roleplaying, getting badges/achievements, exploring, powerleveling, making the most powerful character you can, farming, challenging regular characters, challenging ultra powerful characters, making influence, unlocking macguffins that show you achieved something, playing a variety of events (seasonal or otherwise), pvp duels, open world pvp, street sweeping, missions, task forces.

 

I am sure there are many I have missed.  And I am not sure that players want the devs to support all of things I have listed.  So what playstyles do you like that you want to have supported?

[quixoteprog]

Yes.  All of the above.

 

Except for power leveling. And story. And Teams.  Etc? I could go either way on that.

 

What is etc?

[Demon Shell]

Why do you think this is such a difficult and time-consuming process?

 

The answer isn't one or the other. It's "Yes".

[Schizophobia]

the only playstyle the devs should (and i assume do) support is: DO-only cross-punch + leap kick pve.

 

the whole game should be balanced around this playstyle. will you go for li tieh kuai's earrings in leap kick? or gamble on the unpredictable visor cross-punch? choose carefully.

[DougGraves]

2 minutes ago, Demon Shell said:

Why do you think this is such a difficult and time-consuming process?

 

The answer isn't one or the other. It's "Yes".

 

Because the devs only have so much time.  So saying "Yes" to all is saying you don't care if you get any of them.

 

If the devs spend the next year working only on pvp content for teams of 3 stalkers are you going to be happy?  You said "Yes" to it.

 

[Ukase]

The game as it stands now already supports all of those play styles. The truth is - the only reason for the devs to contribute any time other than maintenance to the game is to keep players interested. Interestingly enough, no new content was added in the 7 years when the game was shut down, and player interest did not wane very much, if at all. I suspect at least 70% of the old player base at least gave the game a look when HC brought it back online.  

The truth is, they shouldn't devote any time into developing the game, only maintaining it. The game is not broken now. Why mess with it? There's so much content, I know I haven't done everything in game yet, despite having numerous level 50s up to t-4, and a badge toon that's pretty much encouraged to do all content to get said badges. 

Anyone that says they've done it all is probably unaware of what they've missed. Need more content - roll a pb or warshade and do Sunstorm's arc. I'm still working through those after all the years I've played. But, I suppose that's presumptuous to assume my experiences are the same for everyone else. I'm sure others have differing opinions. 

As for me, I don't want any new content. I just want the game maintained as is. 

 

[Demon Shell]

Just now, DougGraves said:

Because the devs only have so much time.  So saying "Yes" to all is saying you don't care if you get any of them.

 

If the devs spend the next year working only on pvp content for teams of 3 stalkers are you going to be happy?  You said "Yes" to it.

If you're going out of your way to attack me specifically, sorry, but no I wouldn't mind at all. I play other games, including PvP games. And while I haven't historically PvPed much in CoH, I'm not against it. And if teams of 3 Stalkers is the best way to experience that, I'd be willing to go in.

 

Of course, it wouldn't take a year to balance PvP around teams of 3 Stalkers. It wouldn't take a week. That's an extremely narrow criteria. It would be effortless to complete. That's what formulas are for.

[Yomo Kimyata]

The devs should do whatever the hell they want to do.

[Twisted Toon]

1 hour ago, DougGraves said:

This question is not simply what do players like to do in CoX.  It is what should the devs devote time to and what should the devs adjust the game for everyone to achieve.  

 

Playstyles I can think of (whether or not the dev should support them): solo, small teams, large teams, raids, playing stories, creating stories, roleplaying, getting badges/achievements, exploring, powerleveling, making the most powerful character you can, farming, challenging regular characters, challenging ultra powerful characters, making influence, unlocking macguffins that show you achieved something, playing a variety of events (seasonal or otherwise), pvp duels, open world pvp, street sweeping, missions, task forces.

 

I am sure there are many I have missed.  And I am not sure that players want the devs to support all of things I have listed.  So what playstyles do you like that you want to have supported?

Currently, the game supports all of those playstyles. Are you suggesting that they remove some of them?

 

I think the main thing that this game did correctly was that it "catered" to many different play-styles. Which, drew more people to the game than a game focused solely on PvP or large group content. taking away some of those various play-styles will disillusion some of the player-base that preferred those play-styles, and we'd have fewer people playing the game.

[Oubliette_Red]

Yes.

Not because of "all of them" but because one player's solo is another player's story/team/etc.

[Graviton]

6 hours ago, DougGraves said:

 

Because the devs only have so much time.  So saying "Yes" to all is saying you don't care if you get any of them.

 

If the devs spend the next year working only on pvp content for teams of 3 stalkers are you going to be happy?  You said "Yes" to it.

 

 

So if I abstain does that mean I want the game to go away?  🙄

 

I'm not going to tell a bunch of volunteers working on a free game what they SHOULD do.   I don't expect them to "support" my individual play style.  In fact every play style was developed around game mechanics, rewards, and content, not the other way around, in the first place.  No reason to change that.

[MetaVileTerror]

Let's not forget that Homecoming is _not_ a for-profit venture.  We are not operating on the old paradigms here.  There aren't deadlines and people's jobs under the executioner's axe.  New volunteers can come and go at any moment.  Development cycles are going to be COMPLETELY different now, and I can not stress enough that clinging to The Old Ways is not what the community needs.

 

Just make Content.  Who it ends up being "for" will hash itself out organically as people play it.

[MetaVileTerror]

 . . . in rereading my post, I realize I came across as perhaps too laissez faire.

 

I believe there should be direction, there should be planning, and there should be a dialogue with the community as to what sorts of content players are eager for.  We want this game to have long-term health, after all. 

Instead, I was trying to emphasize how these directions, plans, and dialogue should operate differently than they did before Sunset.  Homecoming has more in common with the Fallout New Vegas Modding community now as far as development cycles are concerned.  Let's look to that community and others like it, so that we may learn from what they did well and how to avoid the mistakes they made.  And, of course, we shouldn't just throw "The Old Ways" that I mentioned straight in to the bin either.  They are just as valuable for lessons and techniques.

 

While communication is a big hurdle right now, what I've been able to piece together from bits and bobs of Dev, GM, and CR posts on these forums is that the current approach is very much a "little a' this and little a' that" holding pattern while they all "Wait and See" about the legitimacy drive.  However, I get the feeling that we've got some industry professionals behind the scenes here as well, as they're holding true to some "best practices" that exist within the industry.
The problem, as I see it, is that these so-called "best practices" are the ones which /publishers/ imposed on developers.  Tactics which can have their lineages clearly traced back to "The Money People."  This is a big part of why I advocate so loudly for the Devs and community here to re-examine "The Old Ways" of game design and development.  A _LOT_ of what is taken for granted as "true and just" was actually put in place and reinforced through careful iterative efforts by executives, administration, and human resources.  I say this from the perspective of someone who was there, working in those positions for fifteen years.  I know a lot of folks consider the execs to be bumbling idiots, since their meddling in games always seems to be idiotic . . . but these people have been frighteningly effective at conditioning the actual creatives in game development (programmers, artists, writers, designers, musicians, sound engineers, etc.) in to believing a staggering number of lies.

 

So, back on track with the original question, armed with this context, I say:
The use of the words "should" and "support" are loaded and leading.  The use of "Dev team" isn't as forward-thinking as I'd hope the Homecoming venture to be.
I propose we rephrase the question as:  "What sorts of new content would you personally like to play on Homecoming?"  

Which, I realize, is specifically the question that the original author was trying to avoid . . . but it really is the most apt question to ask in this new development environment.

[Shred Monkey]

Uh, one of these is not like the others.....  POWER-LEVELING does not belong here.  Here's why.  Power-leveling is doing whatever gives the most experience per minute repeatedly and focusing on doing that one thing as fast and efficiently as possible.  And here's the thing... no matter what the devs do or don't do, in any game, there's ALWAYS a "whatever gives the most experience per minute."   So the activity dev's generally need to do in regards to power-leveling is to keep an eye on the meta power-leveling process and reign it in if it gets too stupid.  Or they just don't do that and leave the power-levelers to their little mini-game.

 

OK, that little rant aside...

 

I think further development should be more of what makes a game distinct and great.... in this game, imho, I think that's the newer style mission-arc/task-force content.  More endgame content like Tin-mage/Apex/ITF/MLTF/LRSF/LGTF... more zones like Dark Astoria.

 

Also update hami and MSR.  MSR turns into a 30 minutes snooze fest I have yet to make it through without deciding to just leave out of boredom.  And Hami just feels old and underdeveloped.   It needs refreshed with some of the new mission tracker windows and generally just made more difficult and epic.

 

Oh, and one more thing while I'm at it, (dangit there's just too many things that make this game "distinct and great.")  I love how finishing a LGTF triggers a Rikti raid... and how Babbage spawns during synapse, and the Malta Goliath triggers from a player mission.  More of this!  Triggering world events by completing team or solo missions is a really cool thing and I think it really fits the current co-op friendly playerbase and game concept well. 

[Lines]

4 minutes ago, Shred Monkey said:

Oh, and one more thing while I'm at it, (dangit there's just too many things that make this game "distinct and great.")  I love how finishing a LGTF triggers a Rikti raid... and how Babbage spawns during synapse, and the Malta Goliath triggers from a player mission.  More of this!  Triggering world events by completing team or solo missions is a really cool thing and I think it really fits the current co-op friendly playerbase and game concept well. 

You’re right. I’ve not appreciated how cool this is nearly enough.

[MetaVileTerror]

Content which allows players to make content.
AE was a great idea, but sadly the original Devs were unable to adequately predict just which direction the Mission Architect would ultimately take.

So, let's try again, this time with a little more structure, and play to the old adage:  Villains Act, Heroes React.

It's been brought up here and there, time and again on these boards . . . but the idea that Villains can start repeatable mission arcs which lead them to organize a crime spree which triggers as a zone event for Blue-side.  Have it be an Invasion-style event, where the enemies come in waves and bursts, and always Con as level-appropriate.  Put these special missions on a timer, so Villains can't just flood Blue-side with never-ending waves of gangers.  If the heroes fail to repel the gang, the Villain gains a Badge and some Infamy.  If the heroes succeed, they get a Badge.

Indirect PvP which plays out with PvE mechanics that already exist.  It gives both sides something to do, and might finally give Red-side the much needed and often requested sense of agency and self-determination for Villains.

[nightroarer]

20 hours ago, Twisted Toon said:

Currently, the game supports all of those playstyles. Are you suggesting that they remove some of them?

 

I think the main thing that this game did correctly was that it "catered" to many different play-styles. Which, drew more people to the game than a game focused solely on PvP or large group content. taking away some of those various play-styles will disillusion some of the player-base that preferred those play-styles, and we'd have fewer people playing the game.

This right here. Well said.

[EmmySky]

I think the Devs should support all playstyles...as in not going out of their way to hamper any of them.

 

What I think you are trying to ask is what directions the Devs should focus updates.

 

I dont think that needs to be categorized by playstyle though.  Obviously, work on bugs and broken things.

 

I think there are different people who work on missions and costumes and zones and events and powers so focus on just one of those would mean other people are helping with something that isnt their forte.  Let everyone focus on what they excel at (UI guy works on UI and powerset proliferation guy works on powerset proliferation).

 

These are all unpaid volunteers at this point so anything they give us (even bug fixes) is greatly appreciated.  I wish I could throw my hat in the ring but the code languages I know are ...no longer in common use lol.

Edited November 1, 2019 by EmmySky

[DougGraves]

17 hours ago, Graviton said:

I'm not going to tell a bunch of volunteers working on a free game what they SHOULD do.  

 

I am going to tell them what I want.  I think it is disrespectful not to tell someone working on something for you what you want.  They can choose to do what they want.  But I subscribe to the agile philosophy that it is far better to say what you want before they start working then to say what you do not like when they are done working.

[jubakumbi]

I want whatever anyone is inspired to create, not what they are told by someone else...

 

Really good creative output comes from inspiration, unhindered by constraints, IME.

 

Let whomever make whatever they are really inspired to make.

 

It is possible for someones desire to spark the creative output of another, so talking about what we like is just fine, but I will still prefer what someone is really insired to create, IME, over what the plan or the group decide they want.

 

I guess I am sayig, don't force any of it, let it happen on it's own and IMO that will be a better result.

[MunkiLord]

2 hours ago, jubakumbi said:

I want whatever anyone is inspired to create, not what they are told by someone else...

 

Really good creative output comes from inspiration, unhindered by constraints, IME.

 

Let whomever make whatever they are really inspired to make.

 

It is possible for someones desire to spark the creative output of another, so talking about what we like is just fine, but I will still prefer what someone is really insired to create, IME, over what the plan or the group decide they want.

 

I guess I am sayig, don't force any of it, let it happen on it's own and IMO that will be a better result.

To an extent I agree, because that would be ideal. But when a product relies on consumers or a community, them liking the product has to be a high priority or the community will eventually whither away. 

[jubakumbi]

34 minutes ago, MunkiLord said:

To an extent I agree, because that would be ideal. But when a product relies on consumers or a community, them liking the product has to be a high priority or the community will eventually whither away. 

So true.

There are so many camps, surely most anything players find fun for any portion of the game would probably be a good addition for multiple playstyles...perhaps I am just too accepting.

 

Hopefully as these threads occur, to your point, volunteers that like to make the type of content that seems to be desired could get inspiration, no doubt, and be encouraged that their efforts would be appreciated.

 

On the other hand, it would be really nice to know what the dev team thinks it's capable of doing, and then having the player base chime in based on that.

I know that would certainly put things in perspective.

[Graviton]

8 hours ago, DougGraves said:

 

I am going to tell them what I want.  I think it is disrespectful not to tell someone working on something for you what you want.   They can choose to do what they want.  But I subscribe to the agile philosophy that it is far better to say what you want before they start working then to say what you do not like when they are done working.

 

Now I'm disrespectful if I don't tell the devs what I want?  Come on.  If I had commissioned the game from them, if I were paying salaries, then you'd have a point.  If I just want to play the game the way it is there's no need to try to guilt me into something else.  I don't agree that they should cater to certain (or any) play styles; I don't agree that anything needs more "structure"; and I don't feel the need to tell the devs how I would do things if I were running them.  I'm not objecting to anybody else making suggestions.  Make suggestions all you want.  But while they are creating content for others to enjoy, I don't labor under the misconception that they work for me, nor that they require my direction, nor that I am a bad person if I don't pester them with my ideas.

[Troo]

On 10/31/2019 at 10:01 AM, DougGraves said:

..And I am not sure that players want the devs to support all of things I have listed.  So what playstyles do you like that you want to have supported?

Whoa whoa slow down there fella. Players don't get to TELL volunteers squat.

 

It is a big game that supports all kinds of things and we are lucky to have access to it as is. Are you asking what people would like to request or suggest be improved or added?

 

I think there should be mini games at the slot machines and arcade games (that might limit my alt building though).

Now that I have voiced my opinion, I have no expectation that will happen unless some genius volunteer shares my wish or I volunteer my time to make it happen.

 

Edited November 2, 2019 by Troo
spelling

[Lost Ninja]

Clearly game should be balanced around multi-boxing as that is what i enjoy... 😛

 

((And for those of you without the humour upgrade that was a joke...))

 

Well not the "I enjoy multi-boxing" part, because I do.