[feedback] bored to death

I understand that what is fun to an individual is certainly subjective but something that possesses the attribute of 'un-fun' is much easier to find when one is objective about the specific mechanic.

As an example let’s say you added a requirement whereby players had to click an enemy and wait a few seconds to slay it once it’s health reached near zero, doing so would give players an awesome finishing move. This would be incredibly detrimental to the fast paced nature of the game even though it is something that’s meant to be awesome for players to use.

If one were to be objective they could realize that the above mechanic doesn’t fulfill one of the goals of the game and thus it would be detrimental to the enjoyment of the game for those that want a fast paced gaming experience.

Explain how subjectivity could possibly find a flaw with the above mechanic – you can’t.

But as you say it's a subjective assessment - thus if you don't find it fun yet others do then there must be an issue with your view of the mechanic. Thus subjectivity has inherent flaws when deciding the fun of a particular mechanic.

Knowing the goal of the game and having an understanding of basic human psychology / human nature are much better tools in my opinion.

Relying on your own opinion simply isn’t enough, play testing is another necessary tool, but one must use objectivity when assessing the comments of play testers.

For example you wouldn’t just subjectively ignore someone’s complaints because they ‘weren’t playing the game right.’

Edit:

"

Mark_GGG escreveu:

You could just as easily say it does fulfill some goals of the game by making the player feel powerful and rewarding the player for being attentive to what's happening, and there isn't an objective way of comparing the benefit from meeting some goals with the detriment from going against others.

There are many ways to accomplish certain goals, in fact there are ways to accomplish goals with little to no detriment of other goals - games are a creative medium and thus it is very difficult not to accomplish certain goals in different or better ways. Using objectivity is still useful as I've shown though.

Actually there are pluses and minuses to every decision in game design and I'm sure each has a value of weight that is important to the goal of the game. That is indeed purely objective.

"

Silver escreveu:

But as you say it's a subjective assessment - thus if you don't find it fun yet others do then there must be an issue with your view of the mechanic. Thus subjectivity has inherent flaws when deciding the fun of a particular mechanic.

I don't find racism acceptable. Many people disagree with me. That doesn't mean I am wrong, it just means there are a lot of ignorant racist people.

I don't like vanilla ice cream. A lot of people like Vanilla ice cream. But, again, that doesn't make my opinion wrong, or flawed, or anything else.

"

Silver escreveu:

The game has 2 acts but many levels, if we consider a level as any one particular area.

Maybe the dev's should employ the game design theory of 'un-fun' whereby any feature that is found to be detrimental to the enjoyment (or fun) of the game is removed.

Though it sounds radical it is actually very effective when used with objectivity and logic.

Call it an act.. call it a level.. call it a zone.. an area.. a segment.

Trying to remove any feature found "un-fun" will result in the developers chasing their tails and little else.

Not necessarily - they can also change things that aren't fun to things that are fun rather than remove it.

The game isn't fun because animations and sounds need complete overhaul (killing mobs no fun), voiceacting and a proper story needed for the sense of why we're doing this, passive tree is a big failure, poor itemization (needs more items, set items and more affixes), no powerful skills, very poor boss battles and so many features are missing such as proper trading, grouping, PVP and its ranks.


I would be hopeful for a fun game in the release if there weren't problems with animations, sounds and the passive tree. I don't think they're gonna change. Boss battles are doubtful too.

"

Mark_GGG escreveu:

By playing it and finding that you don't find it fun, which is inherently a subjective judgement. And finding out if other people agree.

You could just as easily say it does fulfill some goals of the game by making the player feel powerful and rewarding the player for being attentive to what's happening, and there isn't an objective way of comparing the benefit from meeting some goals with the detriment from going against others.

I had lot of hope in you guys developing good game ,but the game got major flaws for me ,to major to survive in my eyes.

The most important in game is battle systems ,because be honest ,you play games like that to mopfloor with dozens of enemies for your enterteiment.
So it should look cool ,it should be diverse and player should have nice possiblity to developer his character towards his own style of masacring enemy.

This game dont give this possibility at all.
Since the 9.1 i played the game in battle system looks the same.
Mana system - annoying at start ,later can be ignored cuz it scale badly removing any limitation in casting of your skill.
Almost all skill cost mana - due to above thing ,you have no limit in using them.
No limit in casting skills - pick one ,the best one ,because there is always the best one (maybe pick two for single target and aoe) and max them. What for picking the trash skills that are weaker in game where are no cooldowns?
Cast of same skill got always same animation - due to the above ,you end up watching your character using same animation for 18923712803 hours to kill enemies ,thats not cool ,but yeah some people like watching 1 animation for infinite amount of time.

Note that i dont count buff/debuff skills ,since they are just support skills. Most important are attack skills in this type of games ,since you spam them alot.

So GGG what are you planing to do with this giant problem ,yes its giant since ask yourself ,how long player can stand casting 1-2 same skills from begining to the end of game?

Then you need to understand how HP and MP steal effect is overpowered in any game ,i mean rly in any. Its must have ,it give lot of defensive and offensive power to the character.
In game like poe where you hit tons of enemies for tons of dmg you leech more than potions give you ,and that should be never possible.

I would add new 2 stats to the game that would resolve the problem. Max HP and Max MP steal cap per spell casted (no matter if single target or aoe ,its not per target ,its per spell).
The base lets say its +1 per lvl ,you can incrase it with passives and gear. Meaning you normaly would have only 50 HP/MP resotration per spell casted on 50lvl ,though you could incrase it to like 100 with gear/skills with would be much better than around 1000 per hit now.

You need to make MP system scale well with lvl and gear ,and add more limitation to skills ,the stronger ones.
You should always pay noticable price for casting powerfull spells.
Add combos ,synergy between skills and cross skills.

I know you dont wanna add cooldowns to game ,though i dont get your logic at all.
Cooldown = limitation to skill = dont want to add.
MP = global limitation to skills = added ,though global limit is way more harder to balance and control by developer.
Sense = there is noone.

Well, as Mark has explained, GGG relies on subjectivity - what is fun is subjective, and their design philosophy and thus game also follow that model.

All I hope to impart as an independent entity to their design group is for them to apply at least as much objectivity as they do subjectivity - which may yield better results for certain system processes.

Anyways, I love talking about game design and so I appreciate whenever a developer talks with me or debates various design ideas.

Thank you Mark for your insights!

(Sorry I didn't post this earlier - I got busy before i could finish my post fully)