Grind?

(SockDog) #81

[QUOTE=Zekariah;376672]Actually, I think that may be the point right there. This is the FOURTH stab for you long-timers. For myself and a LARGE group here, it’s the FIRST. You see, I never bothered to look into W: ET and ET: QW because I always associated them with franchises that I never got into. (except the first Wolfenstein, but a neighbor owned that. not me).

But Brink gained my attention by the very first promo video I saw on Xbox Live a couple of years ago. I’d never even heard of SD, but this game looked to me to be the one to change FPSs forever.

WRONG.

What I thought would be a Sandbox Exploration Adventure in the form of a FPS turned out to be a short episodic shooter with objectives at the heart and rewarded teamplay. But this was still new to me and I enjoyed it…because this was my FIRST STAB at this gamestyle.

As for the long-timers, your expectations were high from a different perspective. You had something to compare it to. And it has obviously not lived up to SD history for you.[/quote]

Agreed and I think this is an element of frustration we sometimes see here where people are, to use an analogy, losing their SD virginity and not surprisingly thrilled to do so, yet they’re also preaching to others like they’re virgins when in fact they’re seasoned old dogs. :slight_smile: Anyway. I think we agree here so lets move on. :slight_smile:

So I pose 2 questions to the long-timers: Would you be willing to give a Brink 2 a go? And would the Badge, Medal & Unlock Grind be a deal-breaker for you?

  1. Most definitely, any SD game to be honest. BUT. I’ll repeat that Brink has soured my trust in SD’s ability to produce a quality product. ETQW may not have earned them money but it got them an instant buy on Brink. Their next title will not be so lucky and I think MANY others will feel the same way. This seems to be something they seem, publicly at least, blissfully ignorant of.

  2. As with Brink I’m prepared to look past that IF the game takes priority. If however the game is secondary to some grind based activity then I’m not sure it’ll really be for me. An SDK being available on release will also help.

And a couple of questions back to you.

If there was no grind but even more polished gameplay would you buy and play the game?

Would simply being able to say “this game is so good I’ve played for 400hrs and still love it” not be a better testiment to you and the game than “hey I’m a Platinum Admiral”?

(Humate) #82

So I pose 2 questions to the long-timers: Would you be willing to give a Brink 2 a go? And would the Badge, Medal & Unlock Grind be a deal-breaker for you?

  1. No.
  2. Im fine with medals, not a fan of persistent gameplay changing unlocks or customisation. I value the ability to play to a specific class, with its specified loadout and class abilities. If I want a gun with a scope, I switch to the class which has the gun with the scope. If I want to heal people, then I’ll change to Medic and live with having to use its designated weapon. Theres really no need for attachments, when they are already attached :wink:
(Zekariah) #83

[QUOTE=SockDog;376674]

And a couple of questions back to you.

If there was no grind but even more polished gameplay would you buy and play the game?

Would simply being able to say “this game is so good I’ve played for 400hrs and still love it” not be a better testiment to you and the game than “hey I’m a Platinum Admiral”?[/QUOTE]

The Brink franchise? Yes. Most definitely. I don’t feel that you could possibly say Brink has a real “Grind” or Recog Reward system as it is now, so I’m already going without it. I’m currently playing for the gameplay, but most of all for the community and friends I’ve made joining it.

As for saying “400hrs reached”? Not really. I don’t enjoy goals that I’ve personally plucked out of the air. I’m a competitive player and enjoy comparing achievements. But if SD or any other developer have not laid down any goals to reach, I find my gametime is inconsistent and I get bored, even if I still enjoy the game.

It’s not so much that I HAVE to reach “Platinum Admiral”, but that it’s a monument when you DO reach it.

It’s interesting that you do mention hours, though. Isn’t that a “personal” badge in itself? It’s not saying you stop there, but everyone deep down wears something they’ve achieved with pride. I’d just like a face to it.

(Zekariah) #84

[QUOTE=Humate;376680]1. No.
2. Im fine with medals, not a fan of persistent gameplay changing unlocks or customisation. I value the ability to play to a specific class, with its specified loadout and class abilities. If I want a gun with a scope, I switch to the class which has the gun with the scope. If I want to heal people, then I’ll change to Medic and live with having to use its designated weapon. Theres really no need for attachments, when they are already attached :wink:[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I should add that when I referred to Unlocks, I meant cosmetic and/or superficial. Not gameplay changing.

I’ll edit that.

(Apples) #85

  1. I dont own Brink 1 :smiley: But I didnt buy it because I KNEW it wasnt for me, I tryed to post some constructives stuffs all around during devlopment time and as it clearly took another path, I passed on Brink, I would have buy it a bit after release but the ATI problems got me off the hook for real this time… Brink 2 why not, but SD really need to kick their own arses and go in THEIR way of making games, not in a publisher’s way… i.e. “We sell we sell we sell, we dont release SDK because we SELL WE SELL WE SELL DLC MOAR MONIES ARRRRR!!!”. This is just utter crap in game development, and while I agree that they need to eat, there is a difference between making 0 monies, making uber profit and ruining your playerbase, and making “enough” monies with a quality game, you know, the middle ground :wink:

  2. Persistant unlocks ARE lame and detract the player from the core of the game, it often breaks the community because of the ranked servers vs unranked one, disallowing people to make mods and maps for the community. It makes the difference of the player non based on “skills” but based on “how long have I been playing” sorta thing… But I heard that Brink doesnt really have this problem “weapon unlock” wise as there arent any superpowerfull weapon you unlock after 1000 hours of play. Grind IS a bad thing, campaign unlock are ok but persistant is meh…

  3. As already said, for SD’s next title, they really should remake an ET with few more map and a polished version (idtech5 for exemple if rage is any good) and sell it for some few quids… The amount of copies sold would insure good profit IMO if they advertise well, make a freaking beta for the old vets and others, listen to their community, dont fix what wasnt broken and MAKE A GAME FOR PC. That should do the trick and that should give them a huuuge playerbase.

Peace

(SockDog) #86

[QUOTE=Zekariah;376681]The Brink franchise? Yes. Most definitely. I don’t feel that you could possibly say Brink has a real “Grind” or Recog Reward system as it is now, so I’m already going without it. I’m currently playing for the gameplay, but most of all for the community and friends I’ve made joining it.

As for saying “400hrs reached”? Not really. I don’t enjoy goals that I’ve personally plucked out of the air. I’m a competitive player and enjoy comparing achievements. But if SD or any other developer have not laid down any goals to reach, I find my gametime is inconsistent and I get bored, even if I still enjoy the game.

It’s not so much that I HAVE to reach “Platinum Admiral”, but that it’s a monument when you DO reach it.

It’s interesting that you do mention hours, though. Isn’t that a “personal” badge in itself? It’s not saying you stop there, but everyone deep down wears something they’ve achieved with pride. I’d just like a face to it.[/QUOTE]

Only a Brink franchise? Similar gameplay in a different setting wouldn’t be as appealing? This isn’t really on topic but for me the setting is inconsequential if the gameplay is the same. I have preferences but I wouldn’t pass up a game just because it’s set in the future or WWII etc.

Okay let me ask a follow on question.

If the game offered competitive tools, clans, ladders, leagues etc, so that you could take your ‘fun’ gaming to the next level and actually compete and win real awards based on skills within the game. Would this not be a very real replacement for awards that just relate to a grind of some description?
And… Sure hours aren’t the greatest comparative indicator I just plucked that one as people with nothing better to do than play a lot don’t corrupt the game unlike someone who’s grinding some exploit in the XP system to win some similar arbitrary award.

(Zekariah) #87

[QUOTE=SockDog;376690]Only a Brink franchise? Similar gameplay in a different setting wouldn’t be as appealing? This isn’t really on topic but for me the setting is inconsequential if the gameplay is the same. I have preferences but I wouldn’t pass up a game just because it’s set in the future or WWII etc.

Okay let me ask a follow on question.

If the game offered competitive tools, clans, ladders, leagues etc, so that you could take your ‘fun’ gaming to the next level and actually compete and win real awards based on skills within the game. Would this not be a very real replacement for awards that just relate to a grind of some description?
And… Sure hours aren’t the greatest comparative indicator I just plucked that one as people with nothing better to do than play a lot don’t corrupt the game unlike someone who’s grinding some exploit in the XP system to win some similar arbitrary award.[/QUOTE]

Similar game, different setting? I think I would do my research first and be a little more patient this time around, but the setting does make a difference to me. I’m not a big fan of WWII or recent history style games. Just a personal preference.

In answer to your Q: I would LOVE to be part of a league or clan! It would ABSOLUTELY take preference over a grind! But the trouble is AU/NZ clans are very exclusive and few and far between, As for US clans, I’ve had a few invites to join, but when I do catch those guys its at all hours of the morning over there, making clan commitments too hard to meet.
I currently catch up with the RIF guys once in a while, but we are generally social players, and it’s only limited opportunities there too.

So playing on my own or with 1-2 mates leaves me wanting more out of my game. Something else to reach for like a grind keeps things…fresh. I don’t know if you are a Gears Of War or Halo player, Sock, but little pop-ups for challenges reached or rank promotion presentations like those games have give a bit of a boost. Makes me want to play ‘just that one more’.
It’s not a case of needing validation, it’s just like a superficial…trophy. Like the real one I could have got if I was part of that clan.

BTW, XP system exploitation can easily we fixed. Teamplay only XP rewards are already in existence, and those that leave their Xbox (or whateva) on idle are getting no XP or bumped from games these days. Bungie and SD both have introduced fixes that are similar to this. However, this should be more commonplace.

(zenstar) #88

I like the Brink setting. I’d happily look at something in the same setting (and purchase it if it looked like a game I’d play). I also like the SD style games and would purchase ET:QW2 in a heartbeat.

If they did a Brink 2 I’d look at it and see if they fixed any of the issues.

And I don’t care much for clans etc… I’m a casual pubber. As long as it’s fun to pub I’ll play, but pubbing requires a big playerbase otherwise you end up getting dominated by the elite few who stick around. And without being able to switch to a server with like minded / skilled people any game quickly loses its appeal.

(shirosae) #89

I’d wait for a demo / open beta first. Which probably means I’d never buy it since there probably wouldn’t be either, like with Brink.

I’m willing to give SD some leeway because they’ve shown they can make good games (or at least games close enough to good that they can be made good by the community), but I’m not getting burned again.

Chances are I’d be more interested if the IP wasn’t Brink. Not because I hate the setting or IP, but because Beth own the IP, and any game using that IP will be tied to Beth and their herp-de-derp lol let’s do no testing nonsense.

Basically though, yeah, I’d be willing to give Brink 2 a fair shot. Really the label on the front of the box doesn’t matter much to me, it’s the game inside. Good FPS games are so few and far between that I’ll give anything a shot to find out if it’s any good or not.

If it interferes with the game, yes. If I need to spend 4875645 hours not playing an fps in order to play an fps, or if the other players are headshotting 6000 wamprats on the edge of the map instead of playing an fps, then the game is no longer an fps.

Basically, I want to play a good skill-based fps game against other people playing a good skill-based fps game, so we can play together/against each other and find myself pushed to the limit of my ability for extended periods of time. If anything added kills that, then the game isn’t fun anymore. Grind and perma unlocks just happen to be an incredibly effective way of killing that fun in an fps.

(BioSnark) #90

Yes, if they draw experience from Brink, and no. The latter was in ET:QW and didn’t break the game.

(zenstar) #91

:frowning: too true. Sad, but true.

Basically though, yeah, I’d be willing to give Brink 2 a fair shot. Really the label on the front of the box doesn’t matter much to me, it’s the game inside. Good FPS games are so few and far between that I’ll give anything a shot to find out if it’s any good or not.

Agree.

If it interferes with the game, yes. If I need to spend 4875645 hours not playing an fps in order to play an fps, or if the other players are headshotting 6000 wamprats on the edge of the map instead of playing an fps, then the game is no longer an fps.

It is now a star wars tatooine shootout?
But yes… you make very good points in this post.

(Humate) #92

[QUOTE=Zekariah;376685]Sorry, I should add that when I referred to Unlocks, I meant cosmetic and/or superficial. Not gameplay changing.

I’ll edit that.[/QUOTE]

Ok to reiterate the second question.
If its cosmetic that is seen on the actual player model or gun, then no.
A symbol indicating rank, next to the players name in the scoreboard is fine.
So if you actually really care that someone knows that youre a Supreme Commander, you know everyone can see it.

(wolfnemesis75) #93

Zekariah has it down: This stuff is a requirement in games now a days. Adds constant rewards and dangling carrots for continued persistence. It also rewards players for trying to improve: usually the more you play, in theory, the better you will get. I think positive Grind is great for games.

(.Chris.) #94

Seems I didn’t get my copy of the Game Design Regulations Part M 2011.

Cookie for anyone who gets the double joke without googling.

(Crytiqal) #95

Since when is this a requirement? I thought playing a game and having fun would ensure continued persistence? The more you play, the better you will get. I agree with this statement, but fail to see how grinding for unlocks will assist with this? If the game has to keep your attention by danglin carrots then the game itself might not be good enough to be fun on its own?

(zenstar) #96

Shooters do not need a grind. Especially MP shooters. Look at how well Q3 live is doing. No grind there as far as I know.
Leaderboards are the only “grind” required for MP shooters and even then those are for competitive players only. Pubbers do not need the grind. TF2 has pretty much zero grind (yeah… some weapons and hats but they’re not “better”).
Maybe ranking (ala COD) is more acceptable on console shooters and maybe this is a difference in expectation between PC and console audiences but as far as I’m concerned the Steam achievements are all the grind required in a MP shooter.
Single player shooters have a storyline (replaces grind) and maybe an RPG element (depends on teh shooter but leveling can be a grind) but MP isn’t about the hours put in, it’s about the skill vs a living opponent. If a MP shooter cannot survive without the grind the grind will not help it survive. Any sort of ranking process will only really be used if the game is successful first.

Diablo 2 wasn’t played because you could grind to level 99 (if you were crazy). It was played because it was fun and there were loot pinatas and you could co-op with friends and try out so many varied characters. And it was played for ages. I wouldn’t be surprised to find more people playing D2 on PC than Brink at the moment. The gameplay has to be nailed down and fun before the grind is added otherwise noone will stick around for the grind.
“Positive” grind is just background stuff that happens if you’re having fun. “Negative” grind is forcing the player to do something repetative just so that they can be competative (negative relative to the type of game Brink is. Grind focussed games like some RPGs need to spice up their grind to prevent it becoming boring and negative).
Positive grind adds very little to an already fun game. Negative grind detracts from the fun of a game.

Basically: Positive grind - /shrug. Not my thing but if you require bragging rights then whatever. Negative grind - no! IMO: grind not really required if the game is good.

(DarkangelUK) #97

It’s a requirement for poorly designed games so they can maybe keep your attention. For fun games that are actually enjoyable, that stuff should be seen as a fun little bonus. If you’re not getting enough from the game that you think grind and bonuses are ‘required’, then you’re either playing the game for the wrong reasons, or the game is so bad that the only solace you can find is from unlocks and shiny badges.

(L00fah) #98

Way to insult a massive amount of RPG games. For A LOT of people, the grind is one of the most exciting parts (offers a sense of reward)… You also just insulted one of the largest player-bases in any FPS - the Call of Duty franchise fans.
I know I love receiving unlocks based on my level, but I prefer how Brink did it with the abilities and outfits - and I love getting “shiny badges” out of recognition for certain in-game achievements. It offers credibility to my claims of any skill and just overall makes me feel like I’m accomplishing something.
All this matters MORE in a multiplayer game lacking in a serious narrative… ALL games offer this in some form or another. If you’re playing a game that doesn’t make you feel accomplished - you probably will not enjoy it.
This can be done through the narrative, mission and/or quest completion or any variety of the “reward system.”

(Crytiqal) #99

But a reward shouldn’t be the goal for an FPS, thus not be “required”.

The gameplay itself should be rewarding, making grinding deemed unnecessary.

(tokamak) #100

It can be part of the gameplay though. Like in ET.