2010-10-01, 10:56 PM
Personally, I'm in total agreement with you Sarah. Working in the computer field, computers become faster and faster every year and there's not a whole lot I can do about it but accept that my computer here will be worthless in five years. Future increases do not relate to the utility I have gained with my computer over those five years.
However, allow me to explain the thought process of those who would be against Big Bang making things easier.
These users usually are older gamers who grew up when games were Nintendo hard. It was a great personal accomplishment to state that one had beaten any sort of Nintendo game due to the ridiculous difficulty curve. These days, games are much easier and more accessible to Joe Gamer. The problem is this - can't a game become more accessible to Joe Gamer while also be hard for Joe Hardcore? I can think of a few games which accomplish this:
Dungeon Fighter - This game is not Nintendo hard, and the game at higher levels requires a party to get through most dungeons. You simply can't do everything yourself, but at the same time the game is a big challenge. As new equipment is released, so there are new dungeons, towers, and game instances. But as the level cap increases, new challenging content is always added for users.
Starcraft II - This game offers a quickmatch feature. Using proprietary algorithms, the game assesses your rank by assigning a hidden score to your profile. As your score increases, you face other people with similar score. This ensures that you're always playing someone at around the same strategic level as the opponent which always leads to more challenging games.
The problem here is that Big Bang does not follow either of these models. As you gain levels and gain more equipment, the game becomes brokeningly (sic) easier. There are no instanced dungeons where you can set the difficulty level. There is no ranking the enemy according to your skill and ability level, and there is no reason to party except to grind more. Where's the challenge in that? I don't doubt that higher level mobs are harder to kill than lower level mobs, but once you've gotten the "Kill 100,000 mobs in 30 days" medal, the game sorta loses its point.
So perhaps a different angle to approach this problem is that "New content makes the game EASIER without retaining any of the CHALLENGE." In the old days, it was a huge challenge to get to fourth job for most gamers. Statistical estimates were that only 0.5% of the total amount of created characters reached 4th job. With a reduced experience curve and a massive nerfing of the mobs along with potential items, set items, cubing, chaos scrolls, and attack medals - the game presents no challenge curve like it did in the past. Now it's not hard anymore. There's no sense of accomplishment for achieving something great because anyone can achieve what you did.
In Starcraft II, more content makes the game inherently more challenging because you have more units that can counter your own but, at the same time, Joe Gamer also continues facing people at his own level. Additional content does not hurt the challenging concept of the game.
In DFO, for the most part, new content (Hero difficulty over Kings, higher level content, etc.) means a lot more challenge and the ability to know more in depth about how every one of your skills work to beat the dungeon. Additional content increases the challenge of the game.
In Maplestory... well... what higher level content has really been added in the past two years? Pink Bean? Time Temple? And then the only way to beat these guys was not through skill, but just by having better equipment and more luck with scrolling. Additional content reduces the challenge of the game.
In short, "Can't Maplestory stay challenging to become less of a grind and more of an ability-based task?"
However, allow me to explain the thought process of those who would be against Big Bang making things easier.
These users usually are older gamers who grew up when games were Nintendo hard. It was a great personal accomplishment to state that one had beaten any sort of Nintendo game due to the ridiculous difficulty curve. These days, games are much easier and more accessible to Joe Gamer. The problem is this - can't a game become more accessible to Joe Gamer while also be hard for Joe Hardcore? I can think of a few games which accomplish this:
Dungeon Fighter - This game is not Nintendo hard, and the game at higher levels requires a party to get through most dungeons. You simply can't do everything yourself, but at the same time the game is a big challenge. As new equipment is released, so there are new dungeons, towers, and game instances. But as the level cap increases, new challenging content is always added for users.
Starcraft II - This game offers a quickmatch feature. Using proprietary algorithms, the game assesses your rank by assigning a hidden score to your profile. As your score increases, you face other people with similar score. This ensures that you're always playing someone at around the same strategic level as the opponent which always leads to more challenging games.
The problem here is that Big Bang does not follow either of these models. As you gain levels and gain more equipment, the game becomes brokeningly (sic) easier. There are no instanced dungeons where you can set the difficulty level. There is no ranking the enemy according to your skill and ability level, and there is no reason to party except to grind more. Where's the challenge in that? I don't doubt that higher level mobs are harder to kill than lower level mobs, but once you've gotten the "Kill 100,000 mobs in 30 days" medal, the game sorta loses its point.
So perhaps a different angle to approach this problem is that "New content makes the game EASIER without retaining any of the CHALLENGE." In the old days, it was a huge challenge to get to fourth job for most gamers. Statistical estimates were that only 0.5% of the total amount of created characters reached 4th job. With a reduced experience curve and a massive nerfing of the mobs along with potential items, set items, cubing, chaos scrolls, and attack medals - the game presents no challenge curve like it did in the past. Now it's not hard anymore. There's no sense of accomplishment for achieving something great because anyone can achieve what you did.
In Starcraft II, more content makes the game inherently more challenging because you have more units that can counter your own but, at the same time, Joe Gamer also continues facing people at his own level. Additional content does not hurt the challenging concept of the game.
In DFO, for the most part, new content (Hero difficulty over Kings, higher level content, etc.) means a lot more challenge and the ability to know more in depth about how every one of your skills work to beat the dungeon. Additional content increases the challenge of the game.
In Maplestory... well... what higher level content has really been added in the past two years? Pink Bean? Time Temple? And then the only way to beat these guys was not through skill, but just by having better equipment and more luck with scrolling. Additional content reduces the challenge of the game.
In short, "Can't Maplestory stay challenging to become less of a grind and more of an ability-based task?"