Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

[PATV] Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - Extra Credits Season 6, Ep. 10: The JC Penny’s Effect

13»

Posts

  • prattwasabardprattwasabard Registered User new member
    In twenty years of persistent-world online gaming, the items that I have treasured most have not been the most powerful, but rather, the most unusual and exclusive. It's my contention that however items come to exist, they should in some fashion reflect the players' actions in the game. Continuity ought to exist between each individual's gameplay experience and their progression.

    A crafting system need not fail in this regard. However, the developers must take care not to make the rewards too generic. If a player kills a ruby dragon, the items produced ought to offer some sort of callback to that particular event, not just a pile of generic residuum that could have fallen from a cobalt dragon, or a stone giant, or the High Mycelite of the Fungal Flans.

    Moreover, it's certainly not for me to define the system -- I haven't properly investigated Firefall, and I don't know what dynamics play into that game's progression or economy. However, if I were making a combinatorial crafting system from scratch, I'd probably put recipes into the game that called for generic material types, then have every monster in the game drop unique instances of those materials. A ruby dragon whelp might drop scales that imparted one set of bonuses to crafted items that called for scales, while their patriarch would drop a much stronger variant and an ordinary giant lizard would drop much weaker scales -- but any of them could be used in the recipe.

    Incidentally, it would be my own preference to have all items permanently decay over time (which would create a demand for weaker, "everyday" gear that would hoover up some of those weaker scales from the previous example), but I lean toward hardcore/permadeath games these days anyway; I might be just a bit biased. Additionally, I'd really want to make a point of building a system capable of entertaining wide lateral/strategic options as well as linear/progressive upgrades; I think it's far better for devs to occasionally step in and nerf an over-ambitious experiment than for them to never stray from the beaten path.
  • MasterFMasterF Registered User new member
    How to make someone make an PA account:
    1.Make him watch Extra Credits
    2.?????
    3.PROFIT

    Components.
    I really would like a system where as soon as you collect a new material,you are informed that you can craft an X number of items that gives immediately a goal to the player. I think it also would feel better than waiting for that 2% chance of finding as a drop that epic sword for your character(assuming the materials drop frequently,if not always)
  • SynraSynra Registered User regular
    Sharing what I wrote in my survey email:

    I think you guys left out a critical point of discussion in this JC Penny video.

    End-Game tokens. Games like WOW, SWTOR and DCUO all make use of these. You grind end-game dungeons and dailys (even PvP) to get these special currencies, and then buy your ultimate equipment directly from an NPC.

    I find that boring. This Firefall crafting system sounds to me more like it is neither a loot system, nor a crafting system, but a token merchant system for all levels of gameplay.

    As a long time MMO gamer (15 years), I have reluctantly cast my vote for Gear. Why reluctantly? Because some MMOs make important item drops far too rare and difficult to obtain. And, when you do get that rare item drop, it is often outclassed by some other item you already own, thanks to crafting, quest rewards or the auction house.

    In a simple question of Gear vs Componants, I have to go with Gear, because random equipment drops come with that "winning the lottery" thrill. It's spending an hour playing through a dungeon with a team of people, looting the final boss, and discovering that he dropped YOUR item. Yay, I win and the rest of you scrubs lost.
  • MrSmith317MrSmith317 Registered User new member
    The best system is one that hasn't been fully implemented yet. You would gather both loot and craftable material. If you want to make a bigger badder X sword, you need to craft onto your existing X sword. If you want to craft a Y sword, you need craftable material which can be looted or derived from existing weapons and armor. There's a great Skyrim Mod for this but it's still not impemented 100% right. Basically material recycling should be the name of the game and done right it will cost time, material, and expertise(the less you know, the longer it takes). That would be my perfect system
  • Khaos ControlKhaos Control Registered User new member
    I believe getting components can not only be better for the player but also still feed rewarding, and a good example of this being done is in the "Monster Hunter" games. If you haven't play it before (I recommend you try it out lol) when you slay monsters/bosses you don't get gear but components to make EVERY gear (and other things like potions) in the game. I would like to see more games start moving toward using the components system (and looting system) of the Monster Hunter series
  • KaosgoblinKaosgoblin Registered User new member
    Combo:
    Pick up weapons from enemy drops, but have those weapons capable of being broken down in town to be reformed for what the player really needs.
  • ShjadeShjade Registered User regular
    I think it's a question of consistency or luck.

    Chances are, people who enjoy gambling, the luck factor, will prefer item drops. Even though that means a lot of the time they'll get things they don't want or can't use, that feeling when the thing you DO want pops up is a rush.

    People who prefer being able to consistently grind their way toward the things they want will probably prefer components: luck factor greatly reduced in favor of nigh-guaranteed (if perhaps slower) success.

    I'd prefer components because I hate unreliable drops. As Aetrion (and others, no doubt) mentioned the whole concept of item progression has problems at its core, but if I had to choose between those two options, I'd take the one guaranteed to (eventually) pay off over the one the might never drop the thing I want even if there's a slim chance I'll be able to get it immediately on my first lucky try.
  • LitleWaffleLitleWaffle Registered User new member
    @discrider

    I'll attempt to defend Aetrion's opinion, while also potentially butchering it, or I may miss the target entirely.

    I think what Aetrion is attempting to say about the poor parts of Item Progression is that the type of item you use doesn't matter. If, say, a Warrior Class can use a Weapon, it doesn't matter what weapon the warrior prefers, because one is clearly better than the other, as all the weapon is is stats. The weapon is essentially just a stat booster, like a piece of armor is, but for offensive statistics.

    Weapons have varying styles to use them by. A Katana focuses on slashing, but can awkwardly do piercing attacks, while a claymore can bludgeon enemies and cut through armor, but is slow and takes quite a lot of skill to manage. However, regardless of the opponents means of defense, one will still be better than the other, because one has better stats.

    Aetrion appears to love the value of choice, but from his perspective, it appears that Item Progression, as it is now, doesn't care about choice at all. It is noticeable from his apparent despise of specific character classes to follow.

    However, I don't think that Aetrion's issue derives directly from Item Progression as a whole, but rather how a standard mmorpg's gameplay is currently executed. Like any WoW clone i've seen, the choices of your items has never mattered. Your character abilities are still there, so your gameplay style never changes depending on your items. It butchers the feeling of good item decision, as it is essentially "do you want +5 to strength, or +70 to strength but -5 to intelligence".

    I would like to introduce Guild Wars 2 to the conversation, as I believe it might be a step in the right direction in this scenario. Guild Wars 2 has weapon skills, as well as character class skills available to a player at any given time. A warrior can only use greatsword skills while wielding a greatsword, or they can choose to go with a bow, two swords, a sword and shield, anything they want. The weapon skills have no variation for a class, as a warrior's use of a greatsword only has 5 skills associated with it, but it develops a style of play.

    A warrior in GW2 can use a sword and shield if they want to be able to jump into a fight and deal damage over time as well as a decent amount of initial damage, as well as wanting to block and stun at an opportune time. A warrior can also have another sword instead of a shield, which allows them to have some range (by throwing the off hand sword), as well as a counterattack possibility, but nowhere near as much blocking potential, and no potential to stun the opponent.

    A warrior's battle style in GW2, therefore, depends on their choices in character abilities, like any WoW clone, but also in their weapon choices, which is a huge leap forward, even if it isn't entirely implemented to the degree that Aetrion was hoping for. A warrior could use a Longbow and be a different style of ranged fighter than a ranger could, or a rifle in a manner different than an engineer, or go up close and personal with their vast repetoire of options, without getting rid of Item Progression.
  • OsterPenPenOsterPenPen Registered User new member
    THIRD OPTION

    Allow me to explain:
    I like building stuff. It's fun. It's why I'm a miner/indy pilot in EVE Online, it's why I got into programming and it's why I still own all of my LEGO's at 26, even if I don't actually use them anymore. So I really like the component idea.

    At the same time, though, many people are more "instant gratification isn't fast enough". So forcing them to stop and build stuff is detrimental to their play experience. So grinding and picking up new gear is much better for their them.

    What I propose is thus: Everything has a high chance to drop a crafting material and a low chance to drop a usable item. However, in order to make a given item, the player must first find one as a "pattern" and reverse-engineer it, with the "pattern" consuming the item, and make a condition that it has to be unused to be analyzed.

    Find a kick-ass raredrop sword? Now you have to decide if you want to use it now, or destroy it and potentially make more later. If you really want to go gung-ho, make it so that the analysis creates an in-game item that can also be bought and sold. Bam, economy.

    The developer still can control the effective drop-rate of anything by controlling the materials, so you don't need to worry about a flood of Ubersword +10's unless someone screws up the drop rates, but it encourages players to interact and trade.

    In many MMO's, the non-combat profession is greatly overlooked. I, for example, like the cooperative nature of MMO's, but don't really enjoy the combat. I don't particularly enjoy combat, period. In Galaxies, I was a surveyor, with just enough combat skills to survive the wastes if I was smart. In EVE, I'm a bulk miner and industrialist, who moonlights as a logistics pilot. Logi being combat without combat. It's great.

    Galaxies had entertainers and doctors, either of which could be taken as a sub-class for field buffs, or a dedicated career. This is in addition to the miners, surveyors, city managers, etc.
  • LitleWaffleLitleWaffle Registered User new member
    I personally like Components over Gear. I'll list out my reasons.

    1. Getting gear from a monster hurts my Immersion. I find it odd when I kill an animal and out pops something like a greatsword. Did it eat the greatsword? How? Why? It doesn't make sense other than "hooray you killed a thing here is your new shiny weapon that doesn't make sense".

    2. The feeling of making your weapon/armor is wonderful. Winning a lottery of sorts doesn't make me feel like I've accomplished anything. Getting the materials I need and crafting exactly what I want puts me in charge of my rewards, and makes me feel like I did something to get what I wanted. Have you ever been doing a quest for the sake of a quest when a monster randomly poops out a super awesome weapon that far exceeds your other one? There isn't much of a thrill to it, really. You slap it on then keep going on that quest.

    3. People wouldn't be grinding in the same spot over and over again. They could go other places, do other things, and still make progress to improving themselves by getting other components that they need. I love a change of scenery every so often.

    4. Going out on a limb, but this might prove to be more of an incentive to mmos to avoid trying to get their players into "the grind". If somebody doesn't have to grind nearly as much to get what they want, mmos are going to need more things to do other than grind more. That is, provided certain components aren't just as rare as some gear currently is.

    I personally tend to avoid having to grind whenever I can now. I don't go out and spend 3 hours trying to get that one cool sword that drops 2% of the time. I go out and do more meaningful things like a quest or a dungeon I've never done before. If components landed in my lap along the way instead of gear, I could go back and get the rush of new gear when I want it, without having to grind just to get the rush. Though I don't normally try to go for the rush in the first place.
  • BureaucromancerBureaucromancer Registered User new member
    The problems as I see them with this survey are that: A) you audience is actively interested in game design, and this is going to make it quite different from the market at large
    and B) this feel vs actuality problem is something that is going to play out in terms of feel, not an intellectual discussion; it's very easy to say that component based systems are better, but how will the people who have said that feel about it a week into the game? I suspect that there will be a significant gap between those who CLAIM to want component based systems and those who will like them in practice.
  • NoptasisNoptasis Registered User regular
    hasn't monster hunter been doing this all this time?
  • ThanatosiaThanatosia Registered User new member
    edited May 2013
    The poll seems like a total waste of time. It's like the authors did not pay attention to their own JC Penny effect story - if you poll customers of course they'll say they prefer honest pricing, but no matter how the poll turns out, it's the day to day feel and experience that matters that you cannot collect in a poll the way EC is trying. I expect the Firefall system will poll superier because intellectually when you sit back and think about it, it's the superior system, but the entire point of the episode is that in the long run, that won't matter in determining rather it's a sucess or not in play.
    Thanatosia on
  • TannesephTanneseph Registered User regular
    In a lot of ways, the question is moot. I believe this was part of the Skinner Box, wasn't it? We respond much better to random reward schedules, it keeps us wondering. And when we finally get the reward we wanted - BAM - that sense of joy. It's much more intense than building up to something.

    What we think we want isn't what we actually respond to.

    That said, as I play WoW, I've wished a million times that I could slowly fill a little progress bar towards things like random-drop pets. So yeah, I -think- I want what amounts to the crafting components in that scenario. I bet if I played it for a few months, though, I would surprise myself with a faster burnout.
  • RoujinRoujin Registered User new member
    There are other problems with Drops V Crafting in that when you craft it doesn't feel as epic or rare, you might know it is going to be just as rare, but someone knowing it dropped from this boss like for instance its "His sword" you just got is way cooler sounds than my character bought a recipe and eventually grinded some strong creatures to get the items... How can you make crafting sound cool? This was an aspect of Swtor that bugged me, as crafting your first lightsaber in Swtor should of been like getting your first lightsaber in Kotor. I imagine you can make crafting cool, like how in WoW making your thunderfury was this long epic questline, but frankly simply putting the items together and watching a progress bar feels meh.
  • ZombieAladdinZombieAladdin Registered User regular
    I have to say that perhaps the JC Penney CEO of truth and honesty may have worked--if he chose a different market than he did.

    JC Penney, like its competitor department stores, is about boutique items and designer brands. These are essentially luxury items. Veblen goods. Their high prices are what attracts people to them, and JC Penney's audience wears these clothes to feel societally accepted. Heck, Abercrombie & Fitch never marks down its clothes in its own stores, and it does fine because these same people will buy these clothes regardless of price.

    If he went to a market where its audiences actually do stuff like compare prices, obtain coupons and rebates, and hunt for deals, I think his model would've succeeded. For instance, Fry's Electronics, while it does the X.99 prices and put a lot of things on sale at a time (though they're more normal store-type sales), deeply undercuts Best Buy, Sears, and RadioShack on almost everything it sells and prospers greatly from it. (It is but a regional chain though, and seems to like being so.)

    Still, most other businesses work in this way: Groceries, books, auto parts, over-the-counter medicine furniture, etc. If one store has a lower price than another store, people go there instead. Instead, he had to pick the one industry whose customers will gladly pay $50 for a T-shirt.
  • CascaOzyCascaOzy Registered User new member
    I like the idea of crafting being more important to gameplay than just minmaxing for PVP. However, I think looking at Knights of the Old Republic II's crafting system could actually make a really good point in this regard.

    Each piece of gear you picked up could be broken down into component parts then reassembled into whatever you had the skill to construct. Invariably, the crafted gear had far greater potential than the drops from enemies but the enemy drops were still concrete enough that they could still feel like a discernible reward.
  • JaentherJaenther Registered User regular
    As a player who dives into the crafting system of any MMO I play, components is the no brainer obvious choice. But I know a lot of people don't enjoy crafting in and of itself, just as a means of filling holes in gear to better blow stuff up. Those people want to kill things and feel rewarded for victory directly. For some people, this system will feel much like D3's auction house, where you're constantly farming the currency to buy what you need because what drops is never going to be as good.
  • discriderdiscrider Registered User regular
    @LitleWaffle:
    Okay, fair enough. However, the thing that a lot of the item progression systems that I've seen do is have you upgrade the base type of your weapon instead.

    So you can pick two handed, or mace, or some other fighting style, but to keep your weapons up to the level standard of the area you're in, you'll have to upgrade these base weapons every so often. This will put you in the uncomfortable position of wondering whether these other good weapons from other weapon styles would be better to switch to even without any trained supporting skills, but you can keep to a theme and often are rewarded for doing so through increased specialisation.

    While sticking to a preferred fighting style is great, item progression will generally force you to abandon your favourite sword/mace/bow/etc for another one every so often. This was where I was coming from approaching @Aetrion 's point.

    I suppose you could have components upgrade your favourite sword, but then I wonder what's so special about a sword you received at the beginning of the adventure and which every sword fighter received a copy of. Either the base type affects the gameplay, or I fail to see how it differentiates itself from every other item of the same base type. If it's merely the history of skills, materials and XP spent on the weapon that differentiates itself, why not pool all that history onto the player character instead?
  • wesaliciouswesalicious Registered User regular
    SWG had the most intricate crafting system i've seen, and yet even that one still had people bitching about the lack of loot drops. We want to be rewarded for our efforts, and a dinky stone knife is no kinda reward for commiting genocide on the Dantari.
  • AradonTemplarAradonTemplar Registered User new member
    This is more of a slider between two extremes: on one hand, you are grinding for a single drop that is relatively rare (item-drop system), but on the other, you are grinding for many items that are relatively more common (component system). The time put in to getting any given item would theoretically be the same. The benefit of the component system is that you can work towards any given item, and make the choice at the last minute of what you want to get, whereas the item-drop system requires you to farm specific content to get a given piece. The benefit of the item-drop system is that each drop is that much more exciting. The difference between going from 5% to 10% completion on your epic sword and going from 0% to 100% on your epic sword is obviously significant.

    The preference for each system is going to come down to each player's level of tolerance: how much time are they willing to invest in farming a sword before they get tired of it and wish they had a more sure-fire means of progression. Case in point: precursors in Guild Wars 2 are required to build your legendaries. They're a particularly rare form of exotic-tier gear, which are probably about as rare as epic world drops in WoW. I've put almost 900 hours into GW2, and seen only 3-4 exotics drop, none of which were precursors. This happens to fall beyond my tolerance for preferring the item-drop method, and I find myself wishing I could grind out a thousand of a more common drop instead, simply avoiding the huge luck factor and sense of futility. Obviously tolerance & preference are different for each person, so it's nigh impossible to find a perfect system that will satisfy every player, though in my opinion, WoW found a pretty good sweet-spot for me.

    In the end, it can't be a simple division between "All of the drop" and "tiny portion of the drop." Instead of needing 30 crystals to make your awesome gear, what about 3 or 4 quite rare crystals? Each one is a significant drop that is exciting in and of itself, but you can still choose what gear you're crafting. It's a matter of finding the right spot on a slider.
  • Abdurrahman KhallofAbdurrahman Khallof Registered User new member
    I think components are much better...
    having Items that U cant/wont use is frustrating and disappointing

    I think to make the components "feel" better, U can make it some times drop unique things, like magical gems, that can upgrade U or your gear in very magical way

    this idea needs a lot of thinking to improve, but I think thats the general idea

    so this way, U'll have the best of both ways...
  • leonerdoleonerdo Stuttgart GermanyRegistered User new member
    edited May 2013
    Great Episode! This is what I learned so far as a little game designer, studying the human being is more important than then trying to change existing game systems.
    Gear and components need different games types in my opinion.
    leonerdo on
  • VarteszVartesz Registered User new member
    Guys, what you are doing is bad science:
    You told everyone which system is better for them and then asked them which system they like more, influencing their decision beforehand, an effect every social / marketing scientist is always told to avoid like the plaque, as it severely affects the quality of your data.
Sign In or Register to comment.