06-27-2004, 01:21 AM
Hi,
Given that there WILL BE a rest state system, and nothing you say or do will change that, how would you implement it in such a way that you would consider yourself satisfied? Note: the answer "get rid of it" is not valid.
As long as the game is based on nothing more than killing critters to get better gear and more power to kill critters, then anything that is artificially introduced to slow that processes down is wrong. And that is equally true of the rest state in WoW as it was of the high level handicaps of D2.
If Blizzard really wants to " free up time for exploring other aspects of the game without penalty, such as tradeskilling and social activities, and helps players avoid level-grinding" then they should make those activities *meaningful* and *pertinent* to the game and not just introduce a punishment for those that concentrate on what Blizzard has made central.
Blizzard has about 90% of a "level less" game already implemented with its attributes, class skills, weapons skills, spells skills (broken at present), trade skills and hopefully talents. If they took that last 10% step, they could make a game where becoming a great blacksmith, or tailor, etc. would be just as as good a goal as killing critters to get a high level. That would be one way in which no rest system was needed and yet the goal of the rest system would be achieved.
Another possibility would be to use an average of a person's skills to determine their level. By making the formula favor multiple skills, people would be more inclined to incorporate more activities into their play, again achieving the goals of a rest system in a positive way.
A leveling process is already in the game, in the sense that gaining levels is an exponential process, but the benefits of those levels is linear. This could be pushed further so that getting to level 40 (for instance) could be done fairly rapidly but getting to level 65 would be much harder.
The whole "level" question is artificial in the first place. For instance, the requirement of 100 skill points and 100 gold for a mount is sufficient. The additional requirement of level 40 is bad design. It puts an arbitrary limit on how a character can play. If a player wants an avatar that is mounted as soon as possible, and is willing to sacrifice all purchases and all other expenditures of skill points for the mount, then a non-linear system would permit it.
In light of that thinking, the level system is much of the problem and the rest system is just an aggravation of the level system.
To answer your question, I can conceive of no rest system under the present overall implementation that I would favor. At best I would consider it a minus in the balance of whether the game was worth having, something that would have to be offset by some plus like superior gameplay. At worst, I would consider it a sufficient detriment that I would not play the game, nor recommend it to others.
--Pete
Given that there WILL BE a rest state system, and nothing you say or do will change that, how would you implement it in such a way that you would consider yourself satisfied? Note: the answer "get rid of it" is not valid.
As long as the game is based on nothing more than killing critters to get better gear and more power to kill critters, then anything that is artificially introduced to slow that processes down is wrong. And that is equally true of the rest state in WoW as it was of the high level handicaps of D2.
If Blizzard really wants to " free up time for exploring other aspects of the game without penalty, such as tradeskilling and social activities, and helps players avoid level-grinding" then they should make those activities *meaningful* and *pertinent* to the game and not just introduce a punishment for those that concentrate on what Blizzard has made central.
Blizzard has about 90% of a "level less" game already implemented with its attributes, class skills, weapons skills, spells skills (broken at present), trade skills and hopefully talents. If they took that last 10% step, they could make a game where becoming a great blacksmith, or tailor, etc. would be just as as good a goal as killing critters to get a high level. That would be one way in which no rest system was needed and yet the goal of the rest system would be achieved.
Another possibility would be to use an average of a person's skills to determine their level. By making the formula favor multiple skills, people would be more inclined to incorporate more activities into their play, again achieving the goals of a rest system in a positive way.
A leveling process is already in the game, in the sense that gaining levels is an exponential process, but the benefits of those levels is linear. This could be pushed further so that getting to level 40 (for instance) could be done fairly rapidly but getting to level 65 would be much harder.
The whole "level" question is artificial in the first place. For instance, the requirement of 100 skill points and 100 gold for a mount is sufficient. The additional requirement of level 40 is bad design. It puts an arbitrary limit on how a character can play. If a player wants an avatar that is mounted as soon as possible, and is willing to sacrifice all purchases and all other expenditures of skill points for the mount, then a non-linear system would permit it.
In light of that thinking, the level system is much of the problem and the rest system is just an aggravation of the level system.
To answer your question, I can conceive of no rest system under the present overall implementation that I would favor. At best I would consider it a minus in the balance of whether the game was worth having, something that would have to be offset by some plus like superior gameplay. At worst, I would consider it a sufficient detriment that I would not play the game, nor recommend it to others.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?