(1)
Albert Einstein allegedly said
“Character power progression is the most powerful force in the universe. That's why we need frequent itemlvl reforms.”
(2)
Pablo Picasso said
“Art is a lie that makes us realize truth, at least the truth that is given us to understand. The artist must know the manner whereby to convince others of the truthfulness of his lies.”
Good games, just like art, lie to their players. They make them accept rules, which constrain them and thus create fun. If you want to have fun from playing a game you want to be lied to. If you don't understand this stop reading right now and feel lucky!
(3)
In Ghostcrawler's favor, I'd like to make one thing very clear: exponential CPP is not an aberration. It is the most natural way of increasing character power. If you gain 10 health while you have 20 health, you get three times as strong. If you gain 10 health while you have 1000 health, you gain almost nothing. Linear CPP becomes weaker over time! To grow stronger at a constant rate, you would need to gain e.g. 10% of health with every 'level'. That is +2 while you have 20 health, and +100 while you have 1000 health. Only exponential CPP makes you stronger at a constant rate!
The real question is not whether a MMO should have exponential CPP. All CPP should always be exponential unless you deliberately want diminishing returns for some reason. The question is whether a MMO should give +10% power with every 'level' or rather +1%.
(4)
What is important to understand is that Ghostcrawler's real reason for continuing the very strong exponential CPP in WoW is not that players need to see big numbers get bigger this fast to want to play the game. The big numbers during endgame are irrelevant for most players participating in that very endgame. Most of them never look at their numbers, or only at their dps in relation to what dps other players do.
I have always been very happy to gain a new item, even if it was just very slightly better. And, actually, the measurable impact on my character's performance from updating one single item was never noticeable in the first place!
Players absolutely care about even the smallest optimizations. Try raiding without reforging - you will likely find out that your drop in performance is not even measurable! Items are a strong incentive for many reasons. The fact that they make your character not just little bit stronger but a little more bit stronger is really irrelevant. Players wouldn't have a problem with much lower percentage increases once they came to accept this as the new status quo.
And even if there was any illusion (lie) left that players believed, Ghostcrawler just mercilessly revealed the truth to them with his blog post.
(5)
The real reason Ghostcrawler wants a very strong CPP is control. In his blog post he wrote:
“Such negligible increases can drive players to do some weird things, such as skipping over tiers of gear or entire levels of content. This is particularly relevant when we’re talking about a new expansion. We don’t want level-85 players to have a reasonable shot at level-90 dungeons and raids (or PvP opponents) just because that content is balanced for gear that isn’t much better than what the level-85 players have.“
Ghostcrawler wants to have control over what content you do with what items. So that he can do a better job at balancing. And I think he is doing the game a great disservice here!
In my opinion, the game would be fun if you could run a lvl90 raid with lvl85 items. Players would still run the lvl90 raids, because the items are better. But players would also enjoy running lvl85 raids for lvl85 items every now and then. In fact, this is exactly one of the things WoW needs right now!
Perfect balancing for a specific itemlvl is unnecessary - a virtual world balances itself in many ways. Great players should be able to run lvl90 raids with lvl80 items and less ambitious players should be able to run a lvl80 raid with lvl85 items to gain items that still improve their character for lvl90 raids. There's just nothing wrong with that. Nothing! Nada! Niente!
But then we couldn't solo old content.
ReplyDeleteWhile I enjoyed soloing old content (or 2-3 man at most) I think this ends up hurting the game more than helping.
I see GC's side of the 85 gear for 90 raids more than yours. It seems to me that you can not have both that
ReplyDelete1) content can be done by 85 gear or 90 gear
2) 90 gear being significantly better than 85 gear.
As a game design, CCP's no levels, diminishing returns has some clear short-term advantages. In the long term, it is flawed since veteran players build up skills. Theme park MMOs keep customers by gear resets: someone who skips most of the prior expansion grinds is not much worse off than someone who played every day.
My guess is that regardless of what the "best game design" is, a game company is that going to try to sell a new expansion "Give us $50 and a few monthly $15" because of "???" is going to have a harder sell if players feel there is a big enough payout.
---------
Then we have my Stare Decisis argument
Rubenfield: “Can you change an MMO drastically after it launches?” Categorically, NO.
Whether your way is better for WoW is an interesting question. But it is irrelevant for WoW. It is a theme-park MMO with levels and gear resets. The die has been cast. What should you put in a new wow-alike and what should WoW do are significantly different questions.
Hagu, I agree in principle, but not in this instance. The 32 bit limitation seems to force Blizzard to do something dramatic, anyway !
ReplyDelete(And WoW has never adhered to Rubenfield ... e.g. LFD..)
---
My point is that I just don't see why lvl90 gear has to be *significantly* better than 85 gear, anyway. I think it is enough incentive to raid, if the gear is better. And if that leads to players having fun with lvl85 raid, it's even better.
---
On new players being outskilled by experienced ones:
1) WoW seperates old and new players, casual and harcores, etc anyway. They don't even see each other. This is not like Eve or traditional MMOs.
2) More experienced player still become stronger much, much faster in today's WOW than new players.
The only reasoning I could accept is that only gaining better items by raiding 60-90 raids would be bad. But that's far from being a danger anyway.
---
On soloing old content: That is a crutch. If Blizzard wants to add soloable content they should do it.
Exponential CPP is not an aberration. It is the most natural way of increasing character power.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't disagree more. Nothing in life grows exponentially in a natural manner. In fact, this would violate all the laws of physics we know. When you increase in velocity, air resistance grows to limit your velocity curve in a log fashion. Similarly, it is practically *impossible* to witness exponential acceleration. I'm speaking of things that everyday humans have a chance of witnessing: the natural world, not fringes of experimental science. The physical abilities of a human being decrease with investment. You go for a run today and clock 25min for 5k. Tomorrow you clock 23min. The day after I bet you won't see another 2min best, much less one that's greater than 2min! The more money you make, the more taxes you pay, and not just strict % based (one can dream). Ad nauseum, examples can be pointed out.
Linear CPP becomes weaker over time! To grow stronger at a constant rate, you would need to gain e.g. 10% of health with every 'level'.
I touched on this above, but linear increases are far more believable. The *disconnect* I don't see you mentioning is the relative CCP with respect to foes. Despite 'how AAA companies do it' with respect to CCP, the relative strength decreases. You kill slower the higher in level you go. So what's the point in scaling your CCP exponentially? You need to be scaling it against something, and if your reference gains faster than your CCP, why force an 'increased growth' system into your meta-game? It doesn't matter what scheme you use if your reference gains exponentially TO YOU.
Players absolutely care about even the smallest optimizations
Speaking to a fellow mathematician/scientist I'd be wasting my breath in explaining how the most marginal of increases actually carries weight as the total of a system is dictated by the product of its components. No matter your method of providing gains to the player (increasing/level/decreasing), they are gains nonetheless and will show with the end product.
once they came to accept this as the new status quo
Nailed it here, I feel. The biggest setback to exponential growth is it spurring a sort of arms race between players. With decreasing gains, it allows people to 'settle' and stay pertinent.
----
In my opinion, logarithmic growth (or other decreasing gain systems) is best. It mimics everything we see around us in life. Furthermore, it introduces a certain 'buy in' to the world in which the gamer is playing. As they increase in level, less extrinsic focus is placed in CPP/items (themselves) and will by consequence shift to other things around them- like the world, its events etc? Furthermore, the final disconnect occurs at level cap. With a decreasing gain system that tapers off with a slope of 0 allows for a very seamless transition from leveling power to 'final' power. Current games of linear growth abruptly stop the power gains with level once cap hits. An exponential system only exacerbates this.
TR Red Skies and ManaObscura both have recent, related posts worth checking out, if interested. Cheers!
^ Also, that noob above meant CPP for CCP. Talk about a Freudian slip.
ReplyDelete"Nothing in life grows exponentially in a natural manner."
ReplyDeleteNuclear chain reactions or spread of a virus come to my mind. Many things in nature grow exponentially. Of course, they eventually hit a ceiline; just like in MMOs.
A constant growth rate leads to exponential growth. And constant growth rates apply to many systems until they meet a boundary.
Nuclear chain reactions or spread of a virus come to my mind
ReplyDeleteThese are systems *acting on* people. These are not witnessed by individuals themselves, as a CPP would be.
These examples would be akin to, again, the reference growing faster than the subject, illustrated above.
I am afraid I don't understand the fine difference you draw here. If nuclear chain reactions are not witnessed by individuals, then what did Hiroshima do?
ReplyDeleteHow course, nobody counted the neutrons, but is there anything the WoW player actually 'counts'?
As far as I know, he only sees a yellow number. And this number doesn't grow exponentially in size, because the decimal system was deliberately designed to logarithmically compress the space which growing numbers require to be written down ;)
I apologize, Nils. Perhaps too many ideas trying to get put to paper at a time resulted in a bit of mumbo jumbo.
ReplyDeleteMy stance is that, through the eyes of an individual going through life, *they* experience decreased gain in practically everything they do.
Make more money- increased resistance from higher tax %. Run faster- increased air resistance. All of the resistances grow faster than the subject performing them. This is analogous to CPP in that it is an event seen through the eyes of the player.
Nuclear meltdowns, runaway machine guns etc... they are plenty of linear or increased growth models out there. I was trying to illustrate that to an individual, through *their* actions (like CPP), they will see decreased gains in their attempt to 'best' their opposition. Trying to get into shape, trying to become financially independant... as assets (CPP) build, so too does the resistance against them, just that the resistance always grows 'quicker'.
Rather than take up real estate on your comment section, it would probably have been better suited as a proper post. Apologies, and, in due time.
My stance is that, through the eyes of an individual going through life, *they* experience decreased gain in practically everything they do.
ReplyDeleteWhich makes exponential growth so compelling, neh?
Besides, if I think I get less benefit out of a game for the same amount of time I funnel into it, I play the game less. Or stop altogether. Why would I look for different things to do inside the game when I could simply play a different game and get another jolt of exponential growth?
@Nils
Players absolutely care about even the smallest optimizations. Try raiding without reforging - you will likely find out that your drop in performance is not even measurable!
Reforging is probably 500-1k DPS depending on class/spec, which is absolutely noticeable.
Even if you were to revise that first sentence to "SOME players" I would still disagree with it simply because it is becoming divorced from the cost of the these slight upgrades, which should be the entire point of the conversation.
The amount of people willing to go to EJ or ask around to gain 1% DPS via Reforging is pretty big (relatively). The amount of players willing to run 15 ZA/ZGs for the 100th time for 1% DPS increases are orders of magnitude smaller. Yeah, everyone likes upgrades. Not everyone likes how much work they would have to put into the game for said small upgrades.
Exponential growth (more) easily justifies doing things that aren't fun in of themselves anymore.
Exponential growth (more) easily justifies doing things that aren't fun in of themselves anymore.
ReplyDeleteBut that's not a problem WoW has. Raiding is usually fun (for social reasons). If it's not fun, players will quit shortly anyway. The epics aren't required to be a big incentive. It's enough if they make players raid.
That's why raiding worked in the classic/TBC model. People ran into Molten Core to finally get that trinket that didn't drop the last six months. This incentive was enough to make them come with us and have fun while we wiped. I went to UBRS over 30 times until my robes dropped. I had fun every single run.
Not because the robes were super powerful - they were not. But because each run in itself was fun. And the robes were a reason to do it. The second the robes dropped, this source of fun stopped working; that was a sad moment.
Exponential growth doesn't happen in a stable system. All your examples happen in a system that was brought into an unstable state and the resulting "explosion" just reverts the system back into a stable state. They are never sustainable.
ReplyDeleteThe exponential spread of a virus is only possible because there are much more humans on this planet then a stable system could support. It takes a lot of effort to make it possible, e.g. agriculture. The virus would just turn the system back into a stable system by reducing the amount of humans.
Same with the chain reaction. That only happens when to much radioactive material is moved to one place. Rarely happens naturally (on earth) and if it doesn't it's not sustainable and corrects itself rather fast by returning to a stable system.
Just like exponential behaviour in MMOs - obviously - reaches limits and corrects itself, eventually, Kring ;)
ReplyDeleteBut much more importantly, by keeping the exponent small enough, the limit is reached very late and practically never.
If every level increases HP by 5%, and we started with 100 HP at lvl 1, lvl 90 would have 8,073 HP.
The problem is when you grow at 10% per level. In that case you end up with 531,302 HP at lvl 90.
And, of course, you can also grow with just 1% per level in which case you get 245 HP at level 90. Which seems most reasonable to me.
> Just like exponential behaviour in MMOs - obviously
ReplyDelete> - reaches limits and corrects itself, eventually,
> Kring ;)
That was Hagus point, wasn't it? That exponential growth normally doesn't happen in the world we live in and (therefore) is the wrong system for CPP in a game we play?
> And, of course, you can also grow with just 1% per level
> in which case you get 245 HP at level 90. Which seems most
> reasonable to me.
100 hp and 1% growth per level would result in 180 hp for level 60. During all of vanilla a level 60 character would not even have twice as much hp as a level 1character!
And 3 expansions later a level 90 character would have 242 hp.
Blizzards numbers did make sense for level 60 characters but break apart at level 90. Your number make sense for a level 90 character but then they don't make sense for a level 60. Or vice verse.
Why should the stat difference between a 1 spell starter character and a level 60 world saving god slaughtering character be about the same as between a level 60 world saving god slaughtering character and a level 90 drunken panda?
You can always find a function that returns the numbers you like for two points. It get's harder if the numbers should fir for many points like at level 1, 60, 70, 80, 85 and 90.
You don't even need a function, you can just set the HP to whatever value you like Kring.
ReplyDeleteTo say it bluntly, I think the problem is understanding relativity. 180 vs 100 HP is a difference of 80%. 242 vs 180 is a difference of 34%.
And this is the difference you actually *feel*. I know it looks wrong when you look at absolute numbers. But absolute numbers are misleading. What counts are the relative percentage differences in power.
Growing 100 -> 180 makes you feel a lot more powerful than growing 180 -> 242.
The difference is not 80 vs 62, but 80% vs. 34%!
Sure because you compare 30 level difference with 60 level difference. From 30 to 60 it's 133 hp to 180 hp which is an increase in 35%, too.
ReplyDelete> To say it bluntly, I think the problem is understanding relativity
But mobs don't deal percentage damage, just damage.
The difference is that with level 60 you were more powerful then an old god, because you killed him, and all you needed was 180 hp. Why should you have 242 hp a few years later? You were already more powerful then a god.
That's insane.
---
But I think I just tripped over that I think they should have never increased the level cap beyond 60. It doesn't make sense to increase a cap during a game, the game would be better if every add-on would just have added level 60 content like end game zones and end game dungeons and stuff.
---
And what you didn't talk about is that every end game tier increases the items without increasing the character. And that's the thing that causes them a headache.
I don't defend WoW here, Kring. I just defend exponential CPP on principle. I can absolutely agree with not increasing lvlcap beyond 60 and instead expanding the game horizontally. I'd love that.
ReplyDeleteMy point is this: If you have less than exponential CPP, the rate of change diminishes with each level.
If you start with 100 HP and gain 50 with each level, this is extremely desirable at level 1. But at level 50 you already have 2600HP and the incentive to gain another 50 is just not very strong. The value of the rate of change - the incentive, tie desirability - diminishes; it is not constant or even linear!
I already wrote in the post that there might be reasons to want that to happen. But it's nonetheless important to understand THAT it happens. Exponential growth is the natural result of a constant rate of change. And a constant rate of change is equivalent with a constant incentive to become more powerful.
There can still be valid reasons to not want a constant rate of change. In fact, the exponential growth that is equivalent with a constant rate of change, might itself be one very valid reason!
Perfect balancing for a specific itemlvl is unnecessary - a virtual world balances itself in many ways. Great players should be able to run lvl90 raids with lvl80 items and less ambitious players should be able to run a lvl80 raid with lvl85 items to gain items that still improve their character for lvl90 raids. There's just nothing wrong with that. Nothing! Nada! Niente!
ReplyDelete... yes, there is. The thing that is 'wrong' here is that old content becomes irrelevant and 'unseen'. Abandoned within the world, if you'd rather.
Nobody puts together 40-man teams to take down C'Thun these days, and nobody bothers with old-ragnaros, or anything similar. These dungeons offer a risk-reward ratio that is utterly outclassed by the no-risk-standard-reward of the simple levelling game.
In fact, these things aren't even really accessible for 'casuals' - even though they're 'doable', what's the point? Why should a casual bother to stab the Eye in the face when they can just go somewhere (anywhere!) else and get a better experience?
The exponential growth model is just one possible model of dozens that have been used over the years. You could point at, say, Paper Mario - where the character may get more levels and abilities, but your basic attack does one damage when you enter the game, and one damage against the final boss mob - you just get more combinations, more situational abilities, more stuff that can be used in different ways against different kinds of defenses. You could do the early EQ growth model which was, frankly, pretty darned linear - each level didn't see exponential growth.
It gets even worse given WoW's story, the emphasis on making you a hero from day one. If guys like Moridin and Arthas exist, why is Westfall a problem? If returning veteran heroes are so amazingly powerful, why would Hogger even represent a tiny threat?
Imagine the difference WoW would be if it had Planetside-type advancement? You have ONE health pool, and it never changes. One mana pool, that never changes. Each level brings with it more abilities, more diverse ways of tackling the world - think Deus Ex: Human Revolution. It has a similar model.
Exponential CCP results in the ancient problem of mudflation (it's been around since the text-only days) - how do you keep content relevant for the veterans if they eventually /outgear/ all content save the very bleeding edge? If the only thing that gives you a challenge is "the last raid" or even "raiding", due to level+gear, how do you keep everyone interested in the longest haul?
How much MORE content would everyone have, if level+gear didn't eventually gear you out of C'Thun and Ragnaros - or even a 5-man dungeon?
Standing Dragon, I almost completely agree. It's just that in my opinion the solution is to increase character power by about 1% per level and not 10%, like WoW does (approximately).
ReplyDeleteMake it 0.1% if you want.
Linear growth models lead to diminishing incentives for characters to grow. This is a big problem, because players get used to one kind of growth rate.
They have less fun if it gets lower all the time. And less-than-exponential growth models lower the rate of growth all the time. Players can get to accept 1% growth per level. But a growth that starts with 10% and then decreases to 0.1% over time is much harder to accept. Not so for me, of course - I could have fun with that, and maybe so could you - but for the masses.
I promise I'll keep it short and succinct this time, and a post of my own in due time =P
ReplyDeleteThis is a big problem, because players get used to one kind of growth rate.
Exactly, but this could be applied to linear, or diminishing gains models as well. You yourself said as much: once they came to accept this as the new status quo. It's merely a question of establishing a standard, nothing to do with *which* standard.
They have less fun if it gets lower all the time. This is empirical, which is fine, but a fallacy to state for general application. Athletes see nothing but decreased gains as they train, and even get to a point where, in order to *just maintain* they need to train- the gains have stopped! But yet we witness millions of players of sports and other games that have maxed their potential. It doesn't make it any less fun, nor offer 'less incentive' to participate. The joy is in the game itself, the activity, not the extrinsic motivators that are applied to the individual.
Lastly, imo, Kring knocked the ball out of the park with his references on the matter.
I promise I'll keep it short and succinct this time, and a post of my own in due time =P
ReplyDeleteI always welcome smart comments, Ahtchu. You can assume that if I reply to your comment and didn't say otherwise, I had no problem with it being a bit off-topic.
---
The joy is in the game itself, the activity, not the extrinsic motivators that are applied to the individual.
I used to say that CPP is like salt in a soup. Every soup should have a little and bad soups profit from more than just a little. But more than a little salt in a very good soup ruins it.
And I stand by that. But whoever wants to make a MMO with e.g. linear CPP needs to understand that this kind of CPP has diminishing returns as an incentive. That's ok if the rest of the soup is just so damn good at end game. In fact, if the rest of the soup is so damn good at endgame, CPP should be as weak as possible!
But then, good endgame is one of the most difficult challenges there are in the MMO industry. I sure have lots of good ideas about player generated content that doesn't require much salt, but except for CCP no big company seems to be willing to test these.
I guess my main point is this: Exponential CPP is not something freakish that WoW came up with although they knew that its going to be unsustainable. Exponential CPP is rather the natural consequence of a constant incentive to grow a more powerful character.
The WoW team apparently thinks that WoW requires a lot of salt to be successful. And considering WoW since early WotLK, they might very well be right!
I always welcome ... comments
ReplyDeleteVielen Dank. An open invitation? Well then...
CPP is like salt
I can appreciate the analogy. It's fitting. Every platform needs a saving grace, and preferably, as many of them as possible.
The [product] team apparently thinks that [the product] requires a lot of salt to be successful. And considering [the product] since earlier [timeframe], they might very well be right!
This gets into a little chicken and egg, or at the very least, cause and effect.
An open-ended question: consider if a current product is because of traits that brought it to its current state, or if a product is at a current state and certain traits redeem it?
Most tabletop RPGs have linear progression and it seems to work fine. The biggest trouble spot with it is rarely high level when the increases are smaller, but at low level when the increases are very large. Level 58 characters with skilled players taking on level 60 challenges doesn't hurt the game much. Level 2 players being terrified of level 3 enemies is more problematic.
ReplyDeleteThe tricky thing is that "linear" progression usually means a linear increase in a large number of different things that multiply together and that may not have linear effects on your overall powerlevel. If you have a linear increase in your damage, chance to hit, chance to crit, chance to dodge, chance to avoid crits, armor, and health that doesn't really result in linear growth since some of those things don't have linear effects. If you have exponential growth in all those things then you get far greater exponential growth than you intended.