Grind?

(zenstar) #101

[QUOTE=L00fah;376963]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.”[/QUOTE]
He’s obviously talking about Brink and similar games (shooters) and he’s not insulting COD because he says “that stuff should be seen as a fun little bonus”. I posit that COD players find the game fun and are not just playing for the grind.

Not ALL games offer a grind. As I’ve stated: Q3 Live is massively popular with no grind. 1 example. Most MP shooters (especially PC, competative shooters) do not offer a grind or have an extremely limited grind. An occasional achievement is not a grind and that’s all some popular MP shooters offer.

(DarkangelUK) #102

I should have stopped reading right there. I think it’s quite clear we’re discussing fps here, and if you thought for some reason I was referencing RPG’s then you’re a bigger idiot than I thought (I don’t think you’re an idiot, so stop trying to prove me wrong).

If you’re playing a game that doesn’t make you feel accomplished

If you need a game to make you feel special and accomplished rather than through your own earnings, then I don’t know what to tell you. Get 20 headshots? Get 10 knife kills? BLEEP BLOOP Achievement Unlocked 15G: You played the game as normal and apparently need a pat on the back for it.

I played CoD since the 1st game for the game, I enjoyed the style so played the others… you think shiny badges made me buy the future releases? But I agree yes, I will insult the braindead masses that play simply for shiny badges and not the thrill of the game itself. I feel accomplished when I can clear a room with 1 clip, when I can knife throw someone out the corner of my eye with a flick shot, when I get the highest score and give away the least points to the enemy… should I not feel accomplished because a pop-up never told me I should? Do you feel nothing unless told to do so? Are you mouthy enough that you need to prove yourself to other gamers when you start shouting abuse, or not stable enough as a person to not bow to others criticism?

I’m more curious if you think CoD is so successful purely because of of this? Loads of games have progression, achievements and unlocks but aren’t nearly as successful as CoD… so I don’t think that’s it’s secret ingredient.

My most beloved and addictive games never had that and didn’t need that, my ability to do what I needed to do at as high a level as I can was my accomplishment. I wouldn’t even mind as much, but achievements and unlocks these days are for doing stuff you should be doing anyway! The only one I can think of where some of the achievements require a bit of skill is Quake Lives Mad Skillz achievements list (There are the silly arbitrary ‘play 100 matches’ nonsense achievements as well). Even the most completed achievement “Use a rocket to kill an opponent who is in the air.” has only been achieved by 21% of the total players! Then there’s the ones that require skill “Record 20 Quad Damage kills in 1 game.” achieved by less than 1% of players.

Anyway, a long winded way of saying I don’t give a flying **** about unlocks and achievements, and being a goal or requirement to have fun is just weak. Anything that forces players away from the core game to get these things is also equally weak and making up for a lacking else where. Sure keep the arbitrary “Well done, you killed people like you were meant to anyway… have a pair of khaki shorts” achievements.

(thesuzukimethod) #103

This thread, like most, is careening…

I understand the original comment about “more grind” to be a comment on it being “too easy/fast” to hit level 20 (a common criticism in reviews, etc.). I for one, dont much care for the leveling, but I appreciated how it forced me to (somewhat) slowly learn the new abilities, since they were only available 1 at a time.

If we’re talking “skinner box” cookies that compel you to “grind”, i’m with the folks at extra credits, and think this is lazy game design (see the extra credits video on skinner box for a really coherent/intelligent take on this)

If we’re talking a game that has levels that helps/encourages you to get better, and occasionally gives you a shiny star in conjunction with said improvement, i think this veers into more appropriate/nuanced/interesting use of rewards.

I wish we just started at level 20 and picked our skills, since the gameplay doesnt necessarily require the abilities for any complex problem solving (game path choice), it’s just how you want to play (class specialization). Deus Ex (for all it’s flaws) does this (game path choice as a function of specialization) quite well. you can pick from abilities that you want to solve game problems in the way you see fit. so it makes sense that you pick up these ability points as you go. Brink? not so much, hence the infinite loop xp exploit that some use just to get a new char up to 20 (24).

In game perks/abilities are intriguing, especially if they persist during a game session (rather than just for a single match)…but i worry that this leads to a cascading level of power among those that are already better in the game. (this is why i think kill-streak perks are sorta lame…basically rewards those who are already better).

this is one reason i really like the Command Post aspect of brink and wish it was more important in some intangible/non-specific way (the reason can be specific, i just dont have any good suggestions)…since this would make capture and control of these points more important rather than just something you do when you run by one… (perhaps the ability to respawn at them, which iknow has been debated endlessly…)

(L00fah) #104

I love how regardless of what I say or how I word things, you people still - and consistently have - missed my points.

Whoever I responded to (I’m assuming DarkangelUK, based on their response) literally said, “It’s a requirement for poorly designed games so they can maybe keep your attention.” That is a broad generalization, with no specific target in mind. So I will point out a genre that that directly insults.
And I mentioned a “grind” as you guys are incorrectly describing it once and went to describe what you’re actually referring to (a reward system). And yes, literally every game you play has a reward system and you’re naive if you say otherwise…
Story progression, achievements, new weapons, new characters, new outfits, etc. etc. etc. are ALL “grind” elements as described here - in that, they are gained through some form of progress in the game itself in some fashion or another (may it be merely by stage completion or “[Getting] 20 headshots”).
I didn’t say I agree with being rewarded for mundane garbage, nor did I suggest that all games’ popularity is due ENTIRELY to senseless rewarding… These assumptions are ridiculous. OF COURSE all progression based rewards should have a point or use and encouraged through ACTUAL progression… Not simply performing a regular feat multiple times.
It completely confuses me how such an assumption can be formed based purely on a singular topic of relevant discussion…
I didn’t read through most of your responses mostly because you all immediately bashed me for supporting a reward system and then continued to assume I was some kind of uneducated gamer who thinks all popular games are popular only because of these features.

I would, however, like to point out - in regards to the CoD franchise (and most certainly WoW, because it’s entirely relevant) - I think the reward/prestige system are one of the main draws that keep people in. Not THE draw, but definitely on the top 3. In fact, it’s something that often shot off in forums or comments (“I’m a 7th prestige level blahblahblah with all perks and weapons unlocked and challenge medals completed blahblahblah.”). If it wasn’t a main draw, you wouldn’t hear or read stuff like that.
But it’s also worth noting that I think the CoD series has become a relatively casual experience where not a whole lot of skill is necessary in most public games.

EDIT: I read through your whole post just now, Darkangel and I want to point out a few things:

  1. I was NOT being aggressive in my first post… NOW I am because I was senselessly attacked just now. That was my disclaimer I SHOULD have included to begin with.
  2. Those points you’re gaining for all your kills…? Guess what…? Reward system.
  3. That sense of accomplishment you feel when you kill a whole room with one clip? Guess What…? Reward system… The game was built to make you feel that way. Same goes for your twitch reflexes… The game was built that way.

My point here (TL;DR?) is that in EVERYTHING you do in a game is based ENTIRELY on making the gamer feel accomplished. If you’re playing a game that doesn’t accomplish this, it isn’t a game you enjoy playing. It’s a game that has failed to some extent. I didn’t even MENTION getting achievements in my first post… I was purely supporting the reward system in video games and explaining that all games have it in some form or another.
I’m guessing most people read what they wanted to read, rather than what I wrote.

(DarkangelUK) #105

[QUOTE=L00fah;376985]I love how regardless of what I say or how I word things, you people still - and consistently have - missed my points.

Whoever I responded to (I’m assuming DarkangelUK, based on their response) literally said, “It’s a requirement for poorly designed games so they can maybe keep your attention.” That is a broad generalization, with no specific target in mind. So I will point out a genre that that directly insults.[/quote]
A thread about an fps game, on an fps devs forum in said games section and a discussion regarding the game directly… and you needed it pointed out? I, and others, thought that was obvious, but no problem I won’t assume that the obvious is so obvious in future.

And I mentioned a “grind” as you guys are incorrectly describing it once and went to describe what you’re actually referring to (a reward system). And yes, literally every game you play has a reward system and you’re naive if you say otherwise…

You don’t regard leveling as grind? Leveling in Brink is accomplished by repeatedly performing tasks to gain experience, I thought the act of repeating a task over and over to eventual gain was regarded as grind? People will inevitably try and find ways to reduce grind time by other methods, which has been done with Brink… people suggesting going Security on a server yourself on CCity, extend the round time and sit by the 1st gate and gain experience over an hour… mundane repetitive tasks performed to gain experience. The driving pursuit is to reach the desired goal of level 25 and unlock all of the abilities to progress your char… sorry dude it sounds like grind to me, but I now see why you suddenly thought of RPG :wink:.

My point here (TL;DR?) is that in EVERYTHING you do in a game is based ENTIRELY on making the gamer feel accomplished. If you’re playing a game that doesn’t accomplish this, it isn’t a game you enjoy playing. It’s a game that has failed to some extent. I didn’t even MENTION getting achievements in my first post… I was purely supporting the reward system in video games and explaining that all games have it in some form or another.
I’m guessing most people read what they wanted to read, rather than what I wrote.

Yeah you’re completely right, I didn’t give it my full attention when I read your post, but I still think we’re verging on grind rather than ‘reward system’. That’s like saying killing monsters over and over again in an RPG to reach level 50 so you can then unlock a more powerful magic element is a ‘reward system’, because at the end of it you gain something. Sure Brink severely shortens the grind time, but the mechanic is still the same. MW2 in a sense embraced grind with the way weapons and attachments unlocked, Black Ops shortened that time by allowing you buy the weapons and attachments you wanted straight away rather than having to work your way to it, so yeah maybe that was the appeal, and the reason why apparently not as many CoD fans embraced Black Ops as they did MW2.

(L00fah) #106

Grinding, in its own respects, is a reward system. It rewards those repetitive mundane tasks in some manner. Reward Systems = gaming.
That is all I am getting it.

Can we stop going back and forth now? This is just getting redundant.

(thesuzukimethod) #107

[QUOTE=L00fah;377010]Grinding, in its own respects, is a reward system. It rewards those repetitive mundane tasks in some manner. Reward Systems = gaming.
That is all I am getting it.

Can we stop going back and forth now? This is just getting redundant.[/QUOTE]

I would argue that a more accurate formulation is
different types of reward systems = different types of gaming.

Here’s the linkto the skinner box critique by extra credits that i referenced. the vid got pulled from escapist b/c they had a contract dispute, so who knows how long it will stay at metacafe, but it’s a great 7 minutes, especially if you’re a social scientist who occasionally works on & writes about game play/design (cough cough), or you’re interested in some of the ways game designers encourage replay.

the TL DR of my post is excellently designed games dont feel like grinding (even if you are) b/c you are also progressing and moving forward (and very poorly designed games feel like grinding even when you’re not. lol)

(L00fah) #108

[QUOTE=thesuzukimethod;377024]I would argue that a more accurate formulation is
different types of reward systems = different types of gaming.[/QUOTE]
So you basically just agreed.
If you learned anything about “proofs” in school, you kind of said the same thing but more defined. That sounds more condescending than I meant… But I’m too lazy to fix it now.
I said “a four sided 2d object is a quadrilateral” you said “a four sided 2d object with all right angles is a square.” Know what I mean?

I can agree that grinding is often described as a drag (hence “grinding”), but that isn’t MY argument. All games, to some extent, are grinding in some fashion. And I’m merely defining grinding as a means to a reward system.
tomato - tomahto… (But it’s ****ing tom-AY-toh… I don’t care what you say!)
:stuck_out_tongue:

(SockDog) #109

And the point of the topic seems to be should that reward system be playing the game itself or many forms of cheese drops. Seems many games are now designed to keep the rats eating the cheese rather than leave the maze.

End of the day a crappy maze is a crappy maze no matter how much cheese you shower it in.

(VG_JUNKY) #110

And the point of the topic seems to be should that reward system be playing the game itself or many forms of cheese drops. Seems many games are now designed to keep the rats eating the cheese rather than leave the maze.End of the day a crappy maze is a crappy maze no matter how much cheese you shower it in.

Perfect Metaphor :cool:

(thesuzukimethod) #111

[QUOTE=L00fah;377028]So you basically just agreed.
If you learned anything about “proofs” in school, you kind of said the same thing but more defined. That sounds more condescending than I meant… But I’m too lazy to fix it now.
I said “a four sided 2d object is a quadrilateral” you said “a four sided 2d object with all right angles is a square.” Know what I mean?

I can agree that grinding is often described as a drag (hence “grinding”), but that isn’t MY argument. All games, to some extent, are grinding in some fashion. And I’m merely defining grinding as a means to a reward system.
tomato - tomahto… (But it’s ****ing tom-AY-toh… I don’t care what you say!)
:p[/QUOTE]

reformed(recovering) math nerd.

my point (i hope people are actually checking out that video link i posted, b/c i feel like it addresses what is being discussed here) is that many games fall back on (a lazy version of) grinding in lieu of real progression, while others really focus on progression… Fallout3 is a great example of doing this well. whenever i leveled up, i happily picked my new skill/ability, but that leveling almost always came as part of natural progression through the story, never repeatedly killing enemies just to get XP. And as i mentioned, DE:HR does a nice job with this as well since you can (like in fallout) pick you augments (abilities) based on how you want to play the game.

These mechanisms are harder to tune (imho) in FPS since there is less flexibility in play style available, so the leveling up just feels like a set of predetermined gates that you have to pass through as part of playing. there is some fun and reward in progressing, and as i mentioned in my first post - i can see the benefit of slowly learning each ability rather than having them all available from the beginning, but i would choose them all to be available and to just let me spec my character with a point budget, rather than making me grind through.

i think this is why the in game perks (killstreaks, etc) are so popular, as there is an immediate (in game) reward for short term (in game) success, rather than slowly accumulating enough xp to place, say, a gatling rather than medium turret. The Resistance 3 beta had some intriguing perks (battle shield, predator cloaking, etc) that didnt seem as cheap/cheesy as some of the COD ones (the helicopter just seems crazy), but i still worry about balance (since successful players are rewarded even more)

Again, i get why people like to level up, and there are ways to implement it that aren’t just skinner box operant conditioning…it’s just harder. Brink has some good ideas here, but i’d still prefer to start at full rank and just pick my abilities and play.

(L00fah) #112

… But I love cheese…

(I cut this down to save space… Also to highlight for my first response:)
SO THAT’S HOW YOU SPELL “lieu”!

I don’t have much to say to most of that honestly. I’m earnestly obliged to agree to most of what you said, and the points I disagree on aren’t really worth mentioning at this point.
But I love having the level progression… I think the main reason Brink falters with this system is the sheer lack unlockable content. We didn’t get much reward (or options, I guess) for leveling up… We were basically barred in to use certain skills.
What would have made this potentially more interesting is if we were given one “class” with all the abilities and then offered, I don’t know, skill trees to truly customize the way our character played and if the objectives weren’t based on the specific classes. Or something… I don’t know where to go with that.
But you get the idea…
And if not, I’ll summarize my overly verbose thoughts:
We didn’t get nearly enough options to actually DESIGN our classes and make the progression feel worth it… Rather it was one more step closer to unlocking the skills we basically HAVE to have… Regardless of what we wanted.

(thesuzukimethod) #113

lol on the cheese and the lieu

agree here - if there was more specialization perhaps? the two chars i mostly play with are triple spec’d lights (a sol/eng/op and a eng/op/medic) and at level 25 i have all the skills/abilities that i feel are necessary to be successful with either of the chars, with any of the three classes…mainly b/c there wasn’t a strong sense of specialization, just the necessary skills - as you put it - the ones you have to have. The only thing standing in my way was the 500-some-odd-thousand XP i needed to buy all the necessary abilities - and this perhaps contributes to the sense that the class differentiation isn’t as pronounced as it could (should?) be

(L00fah) #114

[QUOTE=thesuzukimethod;377037]lol on the cheese and the lieu

agree here - if there was more specialization perhaps? the two chars i mostly play with are triple spec’d lights (a sol/eng/op and a eng/op/medic) and at level 25 i have all the skills/abilities that i feel are necessary to be successful with either of the chars, with any of the three classes…mainly b/c there wasn’t a strong sense of specialization, just the necessary skills - as you put it - the ones you have to have. The only thing standing in my way was the 500-some-odd-thousand XP i needed to buy all the necessary abilities - and this perhaps contributes to the sense that the class differentiation isn’t as pronounced as it could (should?) be[/QUOTE]

Agreed on all counts. Which I think is the first time I’ve said this on this forum.

You mean, by specialization, like… Almost what Borderlands did with the skill tress, right? Like Operative could have three skill trees that you can gradually unlock, for instance; Stealth, Hacking and Sabotage… And you could set points in all of them or could simply specialize in one, right?
Because if it’s something like that, I totally, definitely agree.

(zenstar) #115

[QUOTE=L00fah;377042]Agreed on all counts. Which I think is the first time I’ve said this on this forum.

You mean, by specialization, like… Almost what Borderlands did with the skill tress, right? Like Operative could have three skill trees that you can gradually unlock, for instance; Stealth, Hacking and Sabotage… And you could set points in all of them or could simply specialize in one, right?
Because if it’s something like that, I totally, definitely agree.[/QUOTE]

This all sounds fantastic for a RPG style single player or a Co-op FPS but is not what you want for a competative MP FPS. Overcomplicated character customization and leveling systems bring about a skill imbalance in a game that is meant to be about pitting your skill against your opponents’.
Yes it is possible to have a crazy deep customization but then you’re going to have major problems balancing it as ever added ability has the option for exploitation when used in some unexpected way.
For example: Diablo 3 will have some nice deep customization but they’ve stated that PVP is purely for fun and will not be balanced in any way because a) not the focus of the game and b) way too difficult to balance that sort of customization for pvp without making its effects weak and bland.

If we’re still talking about Brink and grind / reward systems then the best reward system for it would be the “Success” winning screen. If you need more than that then the game probably isn’t good enough to hold your attention, but i guess they can unlock clothing or badges. But that “grinding for reward” system should not be the focus of the game. It needs to be enjoyable to play first and foremost and this means a balanced, skill-based shooter that provides excitement.
Levels do not make me feel excited in a competative FPS.

(Zekariah) #116

I don’t know. I reckon SD got the weapon and ability unlocks timed right. I think lvl 24 is AS FAR as someone should have to go to access these things. In a FPS, anyway. Newbies should not be left THAT far behind in a shooter.

But medals and rank systems give a form of separating casuals from the loyalists. I know I hate coming up against Mythic ranks in Halo: Reach because they generally play WAY MORE than me and have fine tuned even the slightest map location camps. But there, I’m sure there are plenty of Captains that cringe when they see my Colonel badge. But it is due reward or recognition for how far you have come. I look at that Mythic badge and think: “that guy LOVES this game”. And except for the few exploiters, who usually quit once they max out, those REAL players get a tip of the cap from me.

It would be nice to see those kind of rewards in a game like Brink. It’s not NEEDED, but would be APPRECIATED.

(zenstar) #117

[QUOTE=Zekariah;377052]I don’t know. I reckon SD got the weapon and ability unlocks timed right. I think lvl 24 is AS FAR as someone should have to go to access these things. In a FPS, anyway. Newbies should not be left THAT far behind in a shooter.

But medals and rank systems give a form of separating casuals from the loyalists. I know I hate coming up against Mythic ranks in Halo: Reach because they generally play WAY MORE than me and have fine tuned even the slightest map location camps. But there, I’m sure there are plenty of Captains that cringe when they see my Colonel badge. But it is due reward or recognition for how far you have come. I look at that Mythic badge and think: “that guy LOVES this game”. And except for the few exploiters, who usually quit once they max out, those REAL players get a tip of the cap from me.

It would be nice to see those kind of rewards in a game like Brink. It’s not NEEDED, but would be APPRECIATED.[/QUOTE]
Fair enough. As you say there are unlikely to be (in any real number) people who play just for the badges. Some may appreciate the whole badge reward system and I’m not against it. I’m just not for it either since I don’t really care about badges.
I did like the MNC way of doing things though: you got awarded “badges” for all sorts of things (racking up X kills of a certain turret, collecting Y bacon drops, knocking people off the map) both skill based, random / lighthearted based and simple collection based. You chose a badge to display with your name. If you wanted to be “hardcore” you could display a difficult to get badge. Me, I tended to run around with the “I’ve got bacon” badge which is super simple to get but was funny.
But MNC was great fun to play first. You could unlock some customization slots but there was no real grind to it and any leveling up was done over the course of a game using money won by playing (you got cash for killing bots and players and turrets etc… Dota style bots not Brink style bots) and the leveling wasn’t persistant (it’s a dota style 3rd person shooter so think dota and you get how it works. you level up 4 class specific skills instead of buying gear). The only reason why I stopped playing MNC was that the PC community dwindled to the point where it was either play vs pros or go home (and I’m no pro).
I’m looking forward to Super Monday Night Combat. The Free to Play model will probably bring in a massive community and the game was fun. If it doesn’t have any sort of badge system I won’t care at all.
It may be nice to show you’ve gained some level of notoriety/fame wit a badge, but it’s such a minor thing that it’s really a cherry on top of the sunday. If the sunday tastes of poop a cherry isn’t going to help. But for an awesome sunday it’s a nice little addition if you like the cherry. If not you can just put it aside and forget about it. The sunday is the important part.

(Zekariah) #118

[QUOTE=zenstar;377054]
It may be nice to show you’ve gained some level of notoriety/fame wit a badge, but it’s such a minor thing that it’s really a cherry on top of the sunday. If the sunday tastes of poop a cherry isn’t going to help. But for an awesome sunday it’s a nice little addition if you like the cherry. If not you can just put it aside and forget about it. The sunday is the important part.[/QUOTE]

True to that.

I’ve actually been trying to get into MNC for the last couple of months, but it seems it is no longer available for full download on Australian Xbox Live, only the trial. I may still go for SMNC, but that depends if I get my Razer Nostromo and Lachesis by then. (I’m not quite partial to the M/K Shooter yet)

But MNC still pleads the case of the “Grind”. Even the level icons beside the player in the starting lobby is a show of merit or experience to others, which EXACTLY proves my point that Badges get worn, whatever shape or form.

(zenstar) #119

[QUOTE=Zekariah;377061]True to that.

I’ve actually been trying to get into MNC for the last couple of months, but it seems it is no longer available for full download on Australian Xbox Live, only the trial. I may still go for SMNC, but that depends if I get my Razer Nostromo and Lachesis by then. (I’m not quite partial to the M/K Shooter yet)

But MNC still pleads the case of the “Grind”. Even the level icons beside the player in the starting lobby is a show of merit or experience to others, which EXACTLY proves my point that Badges get worn, whatever shape or form.[/QUOTE]
Yeah. The leveling stuff is true but it’s completely inconsequential to the playing of the game (although they did try something with a star rating and servers could set a “max star rating allowed” setting to help keep noob friendly games).
I don’t really see that sort of thing as a grind if it happens on the side and has no tangible reward. I think you and I are seeing eye to eye on this and it’s just terminology in the way :stuck_out_tongue:
If it’s just a number or an icon or whatever then I have no issue with it. It’s not a required grind that you have to do to play. Everyone is still on the same even playingfield and it’s individual skill making the difference. That’s fine by me.

(Tandem) #120

Not a fan of un-lockables or rank.
In ETQW joining a server on the 3rd map of a campaign had it’s disadvantages;
Going up against self-arming mines and reduced spread, those are game changers.

I can’t comment on W:ET,… I’m still learning the ins and outs of that game,
and it looks like most servers have some sort of xp-save going on
with engineers able plant 10 mines.

Just a bad system imo.
Most people don’t stick around for 3-4maps, we all have lives
and sometimes to get in 1game before work is ridiculous with an xp un-lockable imbalance.