FORUMS


Are you intentionally designing a frustrating game?



Posted: //
March 21, 2017, 1:39 a.m.



Robocraft is one of MANY examples where games have attempted to use this kind of model and it's failed. MWO also had a similar system they removed because of the same problems.

The only company which has actually managed to succeed to any real degree with a maintenance-like system is Wargaming (World of Tanks/Warships/whatever), and they as a company have openly ADMITTED IT WAS A MISTAKE. They've attributed NONE of their success to that decision, and have confirmed they succeeded IN SPITE OF using that model, thanks to a large collection of other factors which allowed them to get away with it.

How many of those factors are relevant to Dreadnought? Exactly ZERO. Not a single one.

There is NO way to get into this industry at this time with this model and have any realistic hope of doing well, ESPECIALLY when you're seeing - as the devs here have had ever since maintenance was introduced - mass exodus from your long-standing players.

Large numbers of long-standing veterans simply don't care as long as maintenance is being treated as non-negotiable. Even the promises to "fix" it are falling flat when there's been no fix incoming, and previous attempts to address it have made things objectively worse.

So they're losing the veterans, but they can bring in new players, right? Except word of mouth being spread by the new players is THE EXACT SAME RESPONSE THE VETERANS HAD, and is in fact even worse for them than most experienced players. The only people who are "happy" (even for those people, it's debatable) are the ones already on top who get wave after wave of lower-tier ships to curbstomp, and who have allies to work with when trying out lower-tier ships.

Teamwork, even with the current broken tier system, CAN give you enough of an edge to tip the balance against higher-tier enemies - IF they're only 1 tier above, AND you're playing well enough. T2 vs. T4 is still entirely broken, where T3 vs. T4 can be won if your team is better, AND better organised, than the enemy.

So for someone who's always either just that good or running with a decent coordinated squad to get an edge, it can look less of a problem than it really is. For an average player, and particularly for a less-skilled or new player, maintenance in its current form is absolutely at a level of being game-breaking. Even when done "right" (as right as such a system can be done) it's widely understood in the PC gaming market to be a terrible decision that will chase players away.


http://i.imgur.com/f5SVkIz.jpg
---V^^^V---
Step into your daydreams, and follow them home


Posted: //
March 21, 2017, 2:07 a.m.



I don't mind being crushed by tier IV players, as long as I know I can get to tier IV myself in a reasonable amount of time. Quicken the progression, and everything else, I think, will take care of itself.


Posted: //
March 21, 2017, 2:38 a.m.



Normandy03#6697 posted (#post-114442)

I don't mind being crushed by tier IV players, as long as I know I can get to tier IV myself in a reasonable amount of time. Quicken the progression, and everything else, I think, will take care of itself.

The problem with this perspective right now is the limited player pool. No matter how fast you are progressing to the desired tier, there are expert players, with really well equipped ships, ahead of you and MM keeps putting you in matches with them.

I rarely get to be in a match where I am relevant. Mostly I am cannon fodder, and I seem to be playing the way the developers intended (working with a fleet of ships and adapting to the situation as best I can with each spawn in). I now refuse to play anything besides Onslaught because I got to participate in a 100-0 seal clubbing, as a seal, in Team Deathmatch. At least in Onslaught I can get a few fighters and assault ships. Team Elimination leaves me flying a fighter way too quickly, so that is not a choice either. Training gives you no credit, so ego salving as it might be, it's not a choice either.

I can probably have between 4 and 7 tier 4 ships within a week, but it will not make much of a difference as I will still be matched with players with much more experience and optimally researched ships. It's getting downright discouraging.


Posted: //
March 22, 2017, 12:21 a.m.


Updated //
March 22, 2017, 3:57 p.m.

Dathayn#9671 posted (#post-114365)

Yes the maintenance model does suck. You want everyone to know how good u are? Super...dont really care.

Quite a lot of us play with limited time in the pursuit of fun, not some super competitive drive. We have disposable funds too. If i can enjoy the gameplay sans punishment and feel good about getting somewhere, more funds go to this game. Otherwise, i have other things to play. Pretty simple

That pretty much sums up my feelings too. You want to be super competitive and show off your epeen? Go head. I'll take my money elsewhere thank you very much.

And I just don't get F2P games. Why not just charge a one time fee like is traditional and get rid of the microtransaction shenanigans (at least for anything other than cosmetic stuff)?


Posted: //
March 22, 2017, 1:13 a.m.



Normandy03#6697 posted (#post-114442)

I don't mind being crushed by tier IV players, as long as I know I can get to tier IV myself in a reasonable amount of time. Quicken the progression, and everything else, I think, will take care of itself.

The inherent problem with this mindset is the 'if I can get to TIV myself in a reasonable amount of time.' You can't, because along the way you're constantly against TIV players like myself who are actively incentivized/encouraged to hunt you and ENSURE you lose your game . . . which slams you with negative credit games. the resulting 'one step forward for every 2 tiny steps back' doesn't give itself well to any kind of advance.


-Citizen Soldier -"Do not bring forth an argument that can be disproved with a 10 minute google search."


Posted: //
March 22, 2017, 1:26 a.m.


Updated //
March 22, 2017, 1:30 a.m.

Lincrono#9039 posted (#post-114527)
The inherent problem with this mindset is the 'if I can get to TIV myself in a reasonable amount of time.' You can't, because along the way you're constantly against TIV players like myself who are actively incentivized/encouraged to hunt you and ENSURE you lose your game . . . which slams you with negative credit games. the resulting 'one step forward for every 2 tiny steps back' doesn't give itself well to any kind of advance.

This is my point exactly. Right now it is very difficult to grind up to tier IV. But if this progression is made a little easier (whether reducing costs, reducing maintenance penalties, or whatever), then it won't matter as much that tier II players sometimes play and get crushed by tier IV. They'll still progress. My point is this: Make the game so that even bad players---or weekend warriors---can still feel like they are making progress with each match. Then progression will feel like progression for everyone (and, to my point, getting slaughtered by the veterans won't matter so much).


Posted: //
March 22, 2017, 3:37 p.m.



Still acting like
1- you know anything about the real numbers of player retention and
2- player retention going down wasn't completely normal on this kind of game.

You can spend real money on this FREE GAME to gain ingame resources or elite time that gives you ingame resources.
And the game has to monetize somehow.
Deal with it.


Posted: //
March 22, 2017, 3:50 p.m.


Updated //
March 23, 2017, 12:06 p.m.

Theobald#3611 posted (#post-114569)

Still acting like
1- you know anything about the real numbers of player retention and
2- player retention going down wasn't completely normal on this kind of game.

You can spend real money on this FREE GAME to gain ingame resources or elite time that gives you ingame resources.
And the game has to monetize somehow.
Deal with it.

people will my friend, game will go downhill. This is always the case in these scenarios. I don't want this game to die but it will, unless something change, it definitely will have swift death.


Posted: //
March 22, 2017, 5:25 p.m.



All games go downhill.

It's just repulsive to people that don't want to spend a dime on it, and those people are not paying the bills anyway. Simple facts.


Posted: //
March 22, 2017, 11:06 p.m.



Theobald#3611 posted (#post-114590)

All games go downhill.

It's just repulsive to people that don't want to spend a dime on it, and those people are not paying the bills anyway. Simple facts.

Yes these people excist but when you have people that have already spend money and saying things are bad whats their excuse ?

Point being there are a few F2P games that are pretty d*mn successful and even though they are not in the same genre you can really play them without spending a dime but never feel frustrated. Even with elite status DN still feels frustrating and the fun you can have in DN is overshadowed by the part that is sucking it right out again.

People will pull money out their ears for cosmetics, there are f2p games that survive solely on it. But it works when the game is fun for a lot of people. But right now DN is scaring people away for a number of issues, no we don't have players number info. But you can't tell me you cannot see newer players complaining about issues and queue times getting longer and when they don't just end up against the same people over and over again.

I have seen streamers having a blast in recruit fleets with T1 and T2 but then got into the T3's and almost instantly got put off. Some will push for T4 but even they go along and see the flaws and mention the things we have all heard before.

I don't think many of us from beta and alpha are against monetizing the game because you have to be real naive to think a company can just put a F2P on the market and survive. But there is such a thing as over doing it and just trying to squeeze as much money out of the player base as possible at every chance you get.

This forum is restricted, posts cannot be made.