On design philosophy

Feanor

Back in the day I was an avid Civilization IV player, played competitive Multiplayer in an online league too. The original Civ IV game manual had an interview with lead designer Soren Johnson as an addendum. He was asked what were his design goals and the philosophy behind it given the changes he made from the previous iteration of the series, Civilization III.

Johnson stated that his main goal was to give players meaningful choices that are fun and rewarding. He explained it with examples. Civ III had a mechanic called Dark Ages, where your production, your income and everything else was reduced. Now that was particularly unfun because nobody wants to play a game where periods of gameplay just suck.

Johnson took the idea and made it fun: He simply implemented a golden age instead, where all your empire's output was doubled when you met certain conditions you could influence as player.

Another thing was worker actions. Instead of penalizing the players he overhauled workers and gave them a plethora of options for tile improvement. Those became strategic considering the difference in terrain. Is my city lacking food? Do I need a farm on that floodplain hence? Or is it thriving on food and can I build a cottage, increasing my commerce? Etc

Combat also was made after a Rock Paper Scissors model, giving the player again a lot of meaningful and fun choices (the stack of doom problem notwithstanding).

Why do I dip this deeply into seemingly irrelevant gaming nostalgia? Because ZOS has long ago left the path of rewarding and fun choices that are meaningful. Instead we are given round after round of nerfs, with the seemingly only choice to hop on the class and playstyle which is the least affected by the recent changes.

I would plead, nay, urge ZOS to come back on the path of giving players choices that are actually fun, and meaningful because they are different and powerful in a different way.

If a game a decade ago could do it so splendidly - I'm sure you could as well if you wanted. No more nerfs please. Bring us back to the joy moment when the morph became available and you were presented a hard but fun choice. It's not too late yet.

Turelus

Feanor wrote: »

Why do I dip this deeply into seemingly irrelevant gaming nostalgia? Because ZOS has long ago left the path of rewarding and fun choices that are meaningful. Instead we are given round after round of nerfs, with the seemingly only choice to hop on the class and playstyle which is the least affected by the recent changes.

I would plead, nay, urge ZOS to come Bank on the path of giving players choices that are actually fun, and meaningful because they are different and powerful in a different way.

If a game a decade ago could do it so splendidly - I'm sure you could as well if you wanted. No more nerfs please. Bring us back to the joy moment when the morph became available and you were presented a hard but fun choice. It's not too late yet.

Players who want to be the "best" will follow the meta whatever, even with choices.

Whatever the streamers and theory crafter's say is best, will be best, they will use.

If you want choices make them and willingly be a little less efficient.

Feanor

It's not about having a "best" choice. It's about having a meaningful and fun choice. I have played all classes in both mag and stam with stamPlar being the only exception. I often felt the the choices were so obvious and clear cut that the choice wasn't really one, and thus no fun one. This goes for skills where one morph is so clearly was than the other, skills that are trash altogether, and of course the stam morphs as their mag counterparts where the choice is dictated by the style of play you chose.

Why can't we have distinct and powerful morphs on both ends. This doesn't even touch the issue of nerfs yet. But if you add in nerfs it just gets worse. Progression is a fun thing. It should be back in this game.

Turelus

Well the game sure has more choice than at launch.

Launch the only way to play was Magicka, light armour and staff. Now Stamina is actually a style of play so I can make a choice there, then I choose ranged or melee, tanky or ganky, etc.

The choice is there, just no one want to take the optimal one.

HugeMuffin

Turelus wrote: »

Feanor wrote: »

Why do I dip this deeply into seemingly irrelevant gaming nostalgia? Because ZOS has long ago left the path of rewarding and fun choices that are meaningful. Instead we are given round after round of nerfs, with the seemingly only choice to hop on the class and playstyle which is the least affected by the recent changes.

I would plead, nay, urge ZOS to come Bank on the path of giving players choices that are actually fun, and meaningful because they are different and powerful in a different way.

If a game a decade ago could do it so splendidly - I'm sure you could as well if you wanted. No more nerfs please. Bring us back to the joy moment when the morph became available and you were presented a hard but fun choice. It's not too late yet.

Players who want to be the "best" will follow the meta whatever, even with choices.

Whatever the streamers and theory crafter's say is best, will be best, they will use.

If you want choices make them and willingly be a little less efficient.

But that's what I've found to be so much fun about Live's Azura's Star PvP environment. Removing the cost reduction from CP allows for a wide variety of builds because PvP isn't about being the most efficient, it's about being the one to walk away from a fight. There also was a rocks/paper/scissors aspect to solo play where having the right build could make you gank proof, but it came at the cost of being unable to outlast in a fair fight.

Sadly, I have seen build diversity cut by the recent changes which is the opposite direction of where any game (definition from m-w.com "activity engaged in for diversion or amusement") should aspire to. I have seen builds cut to ribbons by the patch notes while others come out completely unscathed.

Though it's the third patch and it's clear they have had time to work feedback into balance patches, so the unwritten message in today's patch notes is "We are removing choices this month and will not be making any moves to do anything except decrease meaningful choices and diversity."