Many shooters are mediocre (shallow and repetitive), somewhat especially looters -- you need mobility to define shooting playstyles so that AI and other players have something with which to rapport and counter. Section the player's location into 9 and allow action to move him quickly; remember his most often and recent behavior and predict and reward accordingly. Make deterministic, responsive-to-movement recoil. Have open world multiplayer with PvP.
Vastly innovate Diablo IV to have lasting playability. It should at least have a real money auction house. It should have open world PvP with (at least on PvP servers) full loot, and extremely accessible equipment sets that vastly alter playstyles' speed, mobility, and abilities to rival comics. Make it 3D. Only have 1 character level. Make quests optional but rewarding (e.g., a currency for goods and equipment). Risk:reward is arguably the most important design. Players can have as much as they want if its only kept via strategy. Removing items from the economy is the central aspect that allows a variety of roles and worldbuilding. Gathering, crafting, trading, PvE, and PvP are the what to do; make each of them matter so that players can use skillfulness and creativity to keep gameplay fresh and experiences storyworthy. This is true for every genre; singleplayer should usually have living worlds where the character combines various trade skills and magical materials to innovate technology and keep power accessible; every game should try to make fresh, fun multiplayer.
The industry needs to innovate beyond effectively-2D, singleplayer, lobby games, and hub worlds. Each sort of game (character action; vehicular; realistic; comic) has optimals that can be explored by developers and players. Many games have few to no alternatives while being extremely unique and fun (SimCity; The Sims; GTA). All you have to do is immerse the player in a diverse and deep experience.
What are you talking about?
Our debate. We're going to strut you out on stream to actually defend your garbage opinions in a live and public forum. What night and time is good for you?
You're delusional.
Actually, you are. All this gobbledyasiatic nonsense of yours is delusional. Look at that autistic garbage in the OP lol. You're also chickenshit and a pussy. This should be a layup for you.
You can't refute a single point the OP made.
You can't refute being a scared pussy. All you points are also >anecdotes or >opinions. They don't need to be refuted. It's like a much, much stupider version of the Crowder "Change My Mind" shit, but you're even more moronic.
"Everything is subjective!" You have no other argument while ignoring large correlatives provided by science. If you actually can critique simultaneous players, open world, gathering, crafting, trading, PvE, and PvP cohesiveness, multiplayer having surpassed available AI and lasting playability, and persistent worlds having surpassed lobbies, you're free to.
Ian, I'm not here to argue your shitty >objective and >anecdotal OP. That's what the stream is for. I need a time good for you, or you to calmly and openly admit you're a pussy. Deferring to the OP isn't going to work on me.
>[Backpedaling].
he's not backpedalling, he was just talking about how he wanted to debate you
If he can't argue those points here, there is no reason to debate him live.
This is backpedal speak for you not having an argument.
What would be the topic? I listed many relevant points to the industry in that response and the OP. I dont want to go over every genre live because that seems like a huge waste of time when we could have the text.
Stop talking about this; stay on topic.
So you admit you're a pussy and your arguments are forfeit going forward? You intrinsically confess this by refusing to defend them. This is the entire purpose of debate. By refusing it, you admit cowardice or know your points cannot stand.
Decide.
You're behaving cowardly. You can't try to force somebody to do something by trying to intimidate them. I've told you that it seems low worth, and you haven't been able to counter those points or else make a convincing invitation.
Are you ESL or something? They're easy to put together to form your own opinions and standards.
No.
So you admit it you're a coward and your points don't hold water? Very good. It's what I expected. You to make excuses like a slippery snake, to try and weasel out of it. Your attempts to turn it on me are so transparent it's incredible.
Let it be known henceforth:
Nutriments Black person is a coward and knows his shit is moronic. His attempts to turn this onto his challenger are so thinly veiled that they're comedic.
Get out of my sight you weak pussy. Stick to your dick kegels.
You aren't even typing properly.
Why are you posting in this thread if you can't stay on topic?
to laugh at a moron lol
>[Hasn't been able to argue the content].
>[Ad hominems].
Anything relevant? If not, please leave.
>[Refuses to argue in a public forum]
>[Deflects when his points are revealed to be >anecdotes and >subjective]
You repeating the same shit doesn't make it valid.
I would ask you to argue relevant content or stop posting.
>You repeating the same shit doesn't make it valid.
This is you in every thread. Every opinion and every thought on repeat, none of them valid outside some personal belief. They go unsupported, unearned, and unbeliever.
You are a disappointment. Your autism could have taken you to the moon, but instead you're like some manner or human outhouse belching up shit and getting shit on by other posters. A total disappointment.
The Way is beyond disappointment.
I type perfectly, Ian, aside from the occasional type. You type like AI text generation with semicolons sprinkled in. It's actually worse. If you use text generation AI, it's usually better than how you write.
>Are you ESL or something? They're easy to put together to form your own opinions and standards
Yeah, and my opinion is you type like a fricking moron lol. other people are saying that in this thread and laughing. you are literally a laughing stock
i don't care what you talk about, moron kol. I just want to see if you talk like a sped and hear your voice. I can't even read your moronic posts lol
I'm not backpedaling. We're not having a debate in this thread. Time and details or admit you're a pussy. Not submitting to the debate forfeits all your points going forward
>[Nutriments]
is this entire thread copypasta or something
No, OP just talks like a copy pasta. Look up nutriments in the archive for more.
Based Nutriments destroyer. He won't do it. It would almost be worth it just hear him talk like a moron.
AI hands typed this post
Racing is for brainlets
I want GTA to have proper drifting.
>a couple sentences of extremely unnaturally worded but not objectively horrible observations on how shooter design does and doesn't work
>"Have open world multiplayer with PvP."
What the frick?
I would challenge you to write that paragraph better.
It's one of the easiest ways to have lasting playability and a skillful environment that any game can do. If the game's fun, it should be more fun in multiplayer. Developers need to know that.
>I would challenge you to write that paragraph better.
Okay.
Many shooters are shallow and repetitive, especially looter shooters. The biggest culprit of this is bad movement; good movement completely defines a game's dominant playstyles both in how players engage with it and how they counter it. [No idea what the sentence between "... with which to rapport and counter." and "remember his most often..." was supposed to mean. Section the player's location into 9 whats?] Try to let the game not just know where the player is but predict where they're going based on their patterns. Tie in many systems to how the player is moving, including recoil, to further elevate movement to the most important position.
... And then ruin it all by turning the entire game into yet another open world, destroying any semblance of consistent environmental design in the service of combat.
>If the game's fun, it should be more fun in multiplayer. Developers need to know that.
Professor Layton is fun in singleplayer and there's quite literally no way I can imagine it being multiplayer. Are you arguing that point and click adventures shouldn't exist? No, scratch that- are you saying that any genre that doesn't continuously engage players doesn't deserve to exist? Frick off with that.
All of his worst observations funnel into everything should be an always-online skinnerbox with RMAH and bots. He thinks this will achieve some sort of gaming event horizon or schism that literally everyone will play forever, which is moronic, because shit like WoW has everything he's talking about but practically nobody plays it now, and everyone who does is some kind of sunk-cost addict.
He also talks about intensity and skill, bit shuns strict PvP games since they're a little "too intensive," and fighting games are a little "too skilled."
>All of his worst observations funnel into everything should be an always-online skinnerbox with RMAH and bots.
>WoW has everything he's talking about
The fact that you think both of those simultaneously is a huge flag to disregard your post.
If you think fighting and other lobby games deserve to be played all day every day, you need to find a reasonable perspective.
?
People do play fighting games all day.
I don't feel like posting SteamCharts; and the demographic that plays a fighting game, MOBA, or competitive shooter for 12-18 actual hours every day is tiny if existent.
Why appeal to popularity? If that is the case, MOBAs and csgo are the best games.
>The fact that you think both of those simultaneously is a huge flag to disregard your post
Explain. You talk about half this stuff in your OP.
WoW has botting. It has an AH which can be effectively turned into a RMAH with cash. It has open-world PvP. It has node farming. It has a persistent world. You can buy into any activity with cash using sites. There's catchup mechanics. There's vanity items out the ass.
The player base has tanked to only the most insane.
>WoW has botting.
Not legitimately.
>It has an AH which can be effectively turned into a RMAH with cash.
You're not allowed to cash out for real money.
>It has open-world PvP.
To what extent? The player keeps his items that can be repaired for a few gold, and the world isn't affected.
>It has node farming.
>It has a persistent world.
You can't have a bunch of activities that don't affect each other and expect them to be fun.
>The player base has tanked to only the most insane.
It's still one of the most played games. It has like 125k concurrent right now.
You aren't representing an understanding of what a sandbox MMO would be.
If appealing to popularity is the only thing you can get out of the discussions and content used in these threads, you don't have anything to say.
>Not legitimately
You cannot legitimately bot in any game and if you could, everyone would do it.
>You're not allowed to cash out for real money.
That doesn't stop people from doing and everyone knows about. We're talking a out what's in a game, not what's permitted by the developers. If we're doing that, than no botting is permitted. Stick to a side without contradicting your own points.
>To what extent? The player keeps his items that can be repaired for a few gold, and the world isn't affected.
To the extent that it 100% open world PvP. That's what I said. The stakes are low. It's inconvenience. But this is enough to really piss people off.
>You can't have a bunch of activities that don't affect each other and expect them to be fun.
How does node farming and persistent world not effect each other? Node farming is never fun under any circumstances anyways, but nodes are not—or at least they never used to be, I'm not sure about now—instanced. There was competition for resources. Node farming will never be fun. There's a reason tons of people aren't interested in it, but that's beside the point. The point is it's in WoW.
>It's still one of the most played games. It has like 125k concurrent right now.
It's under 100k, which is worse than other games mentioned in this thread. Furthermore, you're either supporting the game and it's player count or insisting everything it's doing is wrong. Argue in at least something resembling good faith and pick a side. Be at least a little honest in your assessment.
>You cannot legitimately bot in any game and if you could, everyone would do it.
So what? They could use their free time to do things they want.
>That doesn't stop people from doing and everyone knows about. We're talking a out what's in a game, not what's permitted by the developers.
No we're not.
>To the extent that it 100% open world PvP. That's what I said. The stakes are low.
That's not what sandbox PvP is about.
>How does node farming and persistent world not effect each other?
The world stays the same.
>It's under 100k, which is worse than other games mentioned in this thread.
Examples?
>"A game having a list of features is the same as it using those features well and cohesively."
You're acting as if WoW is anywhere near the fidelity of a sandbox MMO and pretending as if any of these features are repetable and usable to consistently affect player and world status.
>So what? They could use their free time to do things they want.
Well, for two reason since you haven't thought it out. One, nobody would actually play the game and it would turn into idle clicker. Second, if everyone has a bot, nobody has a bot and botting is pointless. That point has now been effectively dismissed and refuted. One down.
>No we're not.
We are because it serves the example. Either the example has the asset or it doesn't. It has the asset.
>That's not what sandbox PvP is about.
What's it about exactly? Sandbox PvP is not about PvP in the persistent world? This should be good.
>The world stays the same.
Needs further elaboration. Vague.
>Examples?
CS, DOTA, Apex, and TF2 all have more players right now. I just checked. CSGO has almost 5x the players.
>You're acting as if WoW is anywhere near the fidelity of a sandbox MMO and pretending as if any of these features are repetable and usable to consistently affect player and world status.
You're pivoting. I said WoW checks the boxes. Feel free to point to an equivalent and I guess we'll see how it holds up in terms of players. Please, recommend game that uses the features well and cohesively so we may defer to its player count as a model for your ideas.
?
you appealed to popularity first. Your whole schtick is appealing to a nonexistent popularity for the most part except when you have the majority. be at least a little consistent instead of being dishonest
>you appealed to popularity first
Fighting and other lobby games being surpassed by persistent worlds should be self-explanatory.
You're not refuting anything.
>Fighting and other lobby games being surpassed by persistent worlds should be self-explanatory.
They're not, you have to justify that claim. Many, many people don't want persistent worlds. They want a game they can turn on and play, not a grinding simulator that is their second job.
>They're not, you have to justify that claim. Many, many people don't want persistent worlds. They want a game they can turn on and play, not a grinding simulator that is their second job.
Would you rather have something you repeat every game or that can affect your character and world lastingly; a repeated set of simple inputs or a variety of activities that can be explored?
I don't want to play persistent world games because videogames are videogames to me. I don't want to have the stress of losing all of my items when I die. In a game like CS:GO all you lose when you die is a couple minutes. In persistent world games you lose possibly hours of progress. I don't want to have to constantly grind. To stay at the top of the curve in persistent world games you need to grind for the best gear. In PVP in games like that not having that highest tier items will hold you back. On the other hand, in CS:GO every match starts at an even playing field. A player with 2k hours and a player who just installed the game have the same options. For somebody who wants to play videogames to have fun lobbies are better because the lobby is self-contained. You don't have to grind for hundreds of hours to get in a proper match and you also don't lose hours of progress upon dying. Additionally, your second point is false. Lobby games are usually much more complex and have more depth then persistent world games. A game like CS:GO or Tekken is much more skill-based and has much more depth then EVE or WoW. The "variety of activities" in persistent world games are often extremely shallow. Do you actually enjoy all that grinding and consider it a positive?
Neither are you and this is the hill you're dying on. You said you were skeptical of other games virtues because of player counts and thus you yourself placed player counts as supreme. You constantly Siddle between not allowing someone to appeal to popularity while doing it yourself. It's actually totally dishonest and makes it basically pointless to have a conversation
Shit thread, not your blog op
Go write in a homosexual journal
Being able to interpret trends and design quality is game design intelligence.