Jump to content

Welcome!

Sign In or Register to gain full access to our forums.

Photo
- - - - -

uhhh no


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
36 replies to this topic

#26 Evighetens

Evighetens

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4315 posts

Posted 15 March 2007 - 07:37 PM

Solus... not everyone has played this game for a decade. And except for perhaps you, a few select Immortals, and maybe a singular handful of people, I'm quite confident in saying;

NOBODY GIVES A poo ABOUT THE "HISTORY" OF QUESTING.

Yes, people got less practices. That's also because they didn't have to spend 60-80 per stat, or 200 on a single skill or spell.

#27 Solus

Solus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7574 posts

Posted 15 March 2007 - 09:00 PM

Evi, you missed the point.

First class quests were made to award a certain ammount. With this ammount, the rewards between first, second, third, fourth, and archon were balanced. Lowbies didn't really grow faster than highbies.

However, this was changed. Now lowbie quests are broken. They don't reward the intended ammount anymore.

This is why people say to lower lowbie quest rewards.

--

I was not arguing against raising rewards. I was simply explaining one of the reasons people always say to lower rewards rather than to raise rewards.

#28 Solus

Solus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7574 posts

Posted 15 March 2007 - 09:18 PM

Yes, people got less practices. That's also because they didn't have to spend 60-80 per stat, or 200 on a single skill or spell.


Uh, yes they did.

This history is 4.0 history. Not Moon Gate history, which had a quest system that worked differently.

Fewer marks, no level betters, fewer things that gave practices, higher costs to practice skills and spells, and the same cost for vitals and stats.

#29 Rorthron

Rorthron

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1256 posts

Posted 16 March 2007 - 03:11 PM

(From Solus):
Now lowbie quests are broken. They don't reward the intended ammount anymore.

This is why people say to lower lowbie quest rewards.



No they arent, the higher quests are.

Again, I'd disagree with this opinion. Lower level quests generally rewarded a 'fair' amount of pracs (with the possible exception of the 8pp pub quest in Temp. Slightly overrewarding, but fun), until a few people decided that 1-3pp 1st class was more than enough, because, well, they only got 6-10 at Hero/Archon.
Of course, it could NEVER work the other way, that high level quests just dont reward enough...

I really dont think the whole arguement about people reaching end game and maxing out faster if they get more rewarding quests is really an issue... how many people really come even close to maxing out on any of their numerous alts on the current system?
Maybe making it a more realistic goal without needing thousands and thousands of quests would help inject a little more life and fun back into the game.
Don't like it because you're a high level and had to slog for years to get where you are now? Tough. Times change, time for some of the old views to keep up.

#30 Solus

Solus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7574 posts

Posted 16 March 2007 - 03:56 PM

No they arent, the higher quests are.

Again, I'd disagree with this opinion.


It is not an opinion. It is a fact. These quests may make the game more enjoyable and such, and it may even be a good idea to keep them rewarding more; nonetheless, it is the lowbie rewards that are broken.

This does not mean they shouldn't be kept as they are. Raising highbie rewards is a possible solution.

how many people really come even close to maxing out on any of their numerous alts on the current system?


Yo.

Don't like it because you're a high level and had to slog for years to get where you are now? Tough. Times change, time for some of the old views to keep up.


I don't like the idea because I like a game with long game play. I want to continue and develop for years - not reach the end game and tire of it.

Another reason is because of experience. By steadily making things stronger, more rewarding, or what have you, it causes problems with the game. When a system is built to run a certain way and you change things here and there...

--

This said, I do not truely oppose the idea. Thus why I originally only gave an explaination of why people keep saying 'lower rewards'. Likewise, this is why I didn't bother responding on the other thread.

#31 Rorthron

Rorthron

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1256 posts

Posted 17 March 2007 - 04:02 AM

(From Solus):

how many people really come even close to maxing out on any of their numerous alts on the current system?



Yo.



I'd call that reasonable proof.
How long has it taken you?

You, and people like Questman, are NOT the average player, you're something of an anomaly, freaks if you will (in the nicest possible sense :P)

Could the average player max out a character with the current system BEFORE they get bored of the game.

What's the average 'lifespan' of a player? 4 years?

It seems, sometimes, that admin want to keep a longer character development cycle, despite players leaving through boredom with the grind, because it gives them more time to develop some decent end-game content :)
What's more important? The content, or actually having a decent amount of players left to enjoy it?

Don't like it because you're a high level and had to slog for years to get where you are now? Tough. Times change, time for some of the old views to keep up.


I don't like the idea because I like a game with long game play. I want to continue and develop for years - not reach the end game and tire of it.

Another reason is because of experience. By steadily making things stronger, more rewarding, or what have you, it causes problems with the game. When a system is built to run a certain way and you change things here and there...



I'll refer you to my 'anomaly' quote for that one :)

Seriously though, I like a game with a decent development cycle, but it's too long on MM. Especially if you consider that a change can swing things drastically away from 'the norm', meaning some players who may have been in that cycle for years developing their characters suddenly find a lot of that time was wasted due to changes.

In that respect alone, a slightly faster system would pay dividends, because those sort of players would know they wouldnt need to spend another X years of grind and slog just to get back to where they were before the change.

#32 Solus

Solus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7574 posts

Posted 17 March 2007 - 01:36 PM

Though many of us seek to, we are not really supposed to max out are we?
Rather, aren't we supposed to work together with others to over come our weaknesses?

#33 Nobadii

Nobadii

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2330 posts

Posted 17 March 2007 - 02:04 PM

If you weren't meant to max out, then the only way to get hp/sp/st raises would be through levelling. There're mobs in the game (though I'm pretty sure you'll never get close to them) that do require teamwork with a group of maxed characters. Maxing out doesn't mean solo.

#34 Solus

Solus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7574 posts

Posted 17 March 2007 - 02:23 PM

Just because you can continue to grow doesn't mean you are intended to max.

In various Final Fantasy games, you can max. (Be it 255 all stats, roll over, etc...) However, this does not mean you are intended or supposed to.

#35 Nobadii

Nobadii

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2330 posts

Posted 17 March 2007 - 04:03 PM

I think you mean required to. Yes, there are many games where you don't need to max to beat the game, but it does help out. If you weren't intended to max, then they wouldn't have given you options like that.

#36 Solus

Solus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7574 posts

Posted 17 March 2007 - 05:58 PM

We have the option to reach 241:241. Do you think it is intended that we actually reach it, or do you think it is intended we still have room to grow and play?

#37 Evighetens

Evighetens

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4315 posts

Posted 17 March 2007 - 06:02 PM

You aren't required to do anything. However, the main reason people play; That is, to have fun, is far more achievable when you are maxed, then otherwise.

I'm sure if you ask people with stats like
<4025hp 2801sp 2580st>
, they'll tell you it's easier to have fun than with
<2025hp 1801sp 1580st>
.