As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

I gotta do WHAT? [Unlockables in multiplayer games]

245678

Posts

  • solsovlysolsovly Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Core game unlockables are horrible.
    I hated unlocking characters in Brawl/SF4

    Optional achievements/cosmetic unlockables have the potential for being fun. I just hate when people go completely out of their way to get an achivement (i.e. all of TF2 unlockables).

    Forcing me to use/buy some crappy add on device is even worse. I'm looking at you dreamcast VMU games.

    solsovly on
  • scrivenerjonesscrivenerjones Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    haha 'why do you think you are entitled to this video game weapon just because you have bought the video game? you have to WORK (in the video game) to EARN that weapon. yeah it might be FUN to use it, but you have to EARN it FIRST'

    that is a very bad and silly way to think in my opinion!!

    scrivenerjones on
  • METAzraeLMETAzraeL Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    METAzraeL wrote: »
    Seriously.

    Now I had to redo Melee four times because of lost/stolen/damaged memory cards, and that game is freaking hard to unlock stuff in compared to brawl.

    In Brawl you can literally make 5 second matches or do SSE on ridiculously easy and have it done in a few hours. In Melee the quickest you can unlock everyone is what, 7 or 8 hours?

    Also Perfect Dark. A great multiplayer game with great unlockables.
    But what good is having characters be unlocked if all people are going to do is set up matches that run on their own and the only input is hitting start to keep them going? It's great to have stuff to unlock, but does is have to be essential to the game? In a game like Brawl, it only serves to artificially extend the experience, and doesn't have anything to do with people appreciating the game more. It's not like we didn't know who all of the secret characters were before it came out, anyways.

    That's only for unlocking all the characters, you still need to do some other things to unlock the rest of the stages, and that's not even getting into the games crazy amount of stickers, trophies, songs and achievements.
    Well, I actually like unlocking stickers and other goofy things like that (especially songs, although I wish there was more flexibility with using them). I don't mind unlocking stages either, but that's because many of them aren't very fun to play on regularly and the starters are quite good. But as far as characters go, it just seems pointless. If they did something else, like unlocking skins/costumes or other cosmetic options, I would totally dig it.

    Also, SSE was the biggest drag for me. I used it to get the characters, but I basically only played it for that, and I didn't find it fun at all. I haven't tried it since launch, though.

    METAzraeL on

    dream a little dream or you could live a little dream
    sleep forever if you wish to be a dreamer
  • Metal Gear Solid 2 DemoMetal Gear Solid 2 Demo Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    haha 'why do you think you are entitled to this video game weapon just because you have bought the video game? you have to WORK (in the video game) to EARN that weapon. yeah it might be FUN to use it, but you have to EARN it FIRST'

    that is a very bad and silly way to think in my opinion!!

    Why doesn't half-life give me the rocket launcher at the start? What is this bullshit about having to play the game!??!

    Metal Gear Solid 2 Demo on
    SteamID- Enders || SC2 ID - BurningCrome.721 || Blogging - Laputan Machine
    1385396-1.png
    Orikae! |RS| : why is everyone yelling 'enders is dead go'
    When I say pop it that means pop it
    heavy.gif
  • Ginger MijangoGinger Mijango Don't you open that Trap Door!Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    haha 'why do you think you are entitled to this video game weapon just because you have bought the video game? you have to WORK (in the video game) to EARN that weapon. yeah it might be FUN to use it, but you have to EARN it FIRST'

    that is a very bad and silly way to think in my opinion!!

    That is what it was like when the Medic achievements launched for TF2, but Valve learned from there mistake and made easier achievements and ones more likely to be acheived through regular playing, you don't need to work for a weapon, you can play the class normally, having fun and still get achievements that will contribute toward the weapons.

    That is why most of us play, to have fun.

    Ginger Mijango on
  • xzzyxzzy Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Unlockables are dumb and should be outlawed.

    It is "fun" to get something new after working for it, like a pat on the back for doing something right. But when I step into a multiplayer game and everyone's using some awesome gun that I don't have yet, it gets dull really fast.

    Developers should be focusing on making the game fun without the use of gimmicks.

    xzzy on
  • scrivenerjonesscrivenerjones Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    haha 'why do you think you are entitled to this video game weapon just because you have bought the video game? you have to WORK (in the video game) to EARN that weapon. yeah it might be FUN to use it, but you have to EARN it FIRST'

    that is a very bad and silly way to think in my opinion!!

    Why doesn't half-life give me the rocket launcher at the start? What is this bullshit about having to play the game!??!

    single player and multiplayer games are different and are played differently. hope this helps

    scrivenerjones on
  • c4tchc4tch Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    when i buy a mario game, i deserve to be able to play all the mario levels when first turning it on. I should not have to EARN the ability to warp to the end of the game.

    video games are bullshit

    c4tch on
    League of Legends: firecane
  • SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    You have to define "unlevel". As mentioned in OP, the fella responding to me stated that a Heavy having the sandvich works well when a medic is gone. But you have to make a sacrifice with the shotgun, thus limiting your ammo. You'll have to make frequent trips back to resupply if all you have is the minigun, so I don't see why making that trip to resupply for health would be any different.

    Having options open to respond to varying situations is an advantage. If your team has only one medic, or a bad medic, or that medic is covering a different area then having the Sandvich is definitely outweighed by losing the Shotgun...it provides an advantage.

    Same if you're on defense and the offense is somewhat pyro-heavy...being able to choose Natascha as appropriate provides an advantage. Same for Kritzkreig. Same for Backburner.

    And that's before the Blutslauger or the Melee weapons, most of which are just flat-out better.

    But lots of the weapons you unlock in TF2 are very situational, as you have pointed out

    They do provide the upper hand in these situations, but are not only in the hands of the people are good, just the people who consistently play that class.

    Valve originally intended these weapons as rewards for people who play certain classes consistently. People with the mentality of "Oh well I'll unlock the weapons then never play the class again" are...ahm..."doing it wrong."

    And none of the achievements in TF2 are hard to get. You can go through the milestones pretty easily, even if you're not trying, if you just play that class a lot
    And the TX Dept of Transport intended to have people taking the toll road near my apartment at only 40 mph, but when they never put cops on there and they're charging for access to a highway with a speed limit barely faster than a residential zone, it's safe to say that their enthusiasm doesn't match their intent.

    Valve may have intended that only people who play the class often, or very well, should get the achievements and have the weapons, but the fact is that maybe half a day after the medic unlockables came out, there were custom servers and maps springing up all over for the express purpose of getting them in minutes rather than hours or days. They haven't put a lock on certain server variables have they? Or banned people who play achievement_x maps? I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that they don't particularly want players to get their achievements this way, but any action taken to that end would hurt more than help. So is it okay to circumvent the intent of the devs so long as you do it using a method they can't easily stop?

    Welcome to the unlocker.

    SithDrummer on
  • scrivenerjonesscrivenerjones Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    c4tch wrote: »
    when i buy a mario game, i deserve to be able to play all the mario levels when first turning it on. I should not have to EARN the ability to warp to the end of the game.

    video games are bullshit

    try scrolling up a post! ok!

    scrivenerjones on
  • SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    And in a general sense regarding unlockables for competitive online games:

    Zealot wrote: »
    It's far better than having to pay real money for them.
    Leitner wrote: »
    Aesthetic ones are great, all the others are generally a poor idea at best.

    SithDrummer on
  • Canada_jezusCanada_jezus Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I achievement managed the scout unlocks in because i honestly play like two hours a week max and i will be goddamned if i don't get to try out the new toys.

    Canada_jezus on
  • c4tchc4tch Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    c4tch wrote: »
    when i buy a mario game, i deserve to be able to play all the mario levels when first turning it on. I should not have to EARN the ability to warp to the end of the game.

    video games are bullshit

    try scrolling up a post! ok!

    when i play an online RTS, all strategies for all races should be implicitly built into the game so that I am not put at a disadvantage for my lack of experience.

    video games are bullshit.

    c4tch on
    League of Legends: firecane
  • PeewiPeewi Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I like how in Super Smash Bros. all the characters can be unlocked by playing multiplayer. All other fighting games I've played require you to play singleplayer to unlock the characters. More games should let you unlock stuff in both single and multiplayer.

    Peewi on
  • RenzoRenzo Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Peewi wrote: »
    I like how in Super Smash Bros. all the characters can be unlocked by playing multiplayer. All other fighting games I've played require you to play singleplayer to unlock the characters. More games should let you unlock stuff in both single and multiplayer.

    ding ding ding

    I also like having persistent characters or profiles across single and multi. HAWX, for example, lets you earn experience across both modes. Not all games can work this way, but it's great when they do.

    Renzo on
  • scrivenerjonesscrivenerjones Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    c4tch wrote: »
    c4tch wrote: »
    when i buy a mario game, i deserve to be able to play all the mario levels when first turning it on. I should not have to EARN the ability to warp to the end of the game.

    video games are bullshit

    try scrolling up a post! ok!

    when i play an online RTS, all strategies for all races should be implicitly built into the game so that I am not put at a disadvantage for my lack of experience.

    video games are bullshit.

    im sitting here in this boring ass class trying to translate this post into realtalk and its not going so hot--is the suggestion that starcraft not coming with a strategy guide with build orders is the same as having to grind achievements in tf2? because that doesnt really make sense?

    scrivenerjones on
  • SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    haha 'why do you think you are entitled to this video game weapon just because you have bought the video game? you have to WORK (in the video game) to EARN that weapon. yeah it might be FUN to use it, but you have to EARN it FIRST'

    that is a very bad and silly way to think in my opinion!!

    Why doesn't half-life give me the rocket launcher at the start? What is this bullshit about having to play the game!??!
    If you want cases of imbalance, see various versions of Company of Heroes as it went through the patching stages. From overpowered infantry to 1 second artillery that the other side does not have the ability to get themselves
    You have really, really horrible analogy-making skills. I acknowledge that the toll road probably has its fair share of (pot?)holes, but you're talking about one game in which both sides are designed to be different (i.e. not TF2), and another game's single player campaign (again, not TF2).

    SithDrummer on
  • ArrathArrath Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I like unlockables in multiplayer. It gives it a sense of purpose beyond "Kill those dudes dressed differently." For example in CoD first I'm working towards a shiny new gun I have a fancy for, then once I have it I'm working towards useful little attachments for it. It doesn't unbalance the gameplay in any way, the base pre-made classes can kill stuff just fine (even if their perks are a bit odd).

    My one gripe with CoD is the challenge system, so often I'll have done some hard/out of the way challenge, only before I've unlocked it. Kill three guys and myself with a grenade still in my hand? Done it, but I don't get credit for it because I haven't unlocked that challenge yet.

    I think Battlefield: Bad Company may have done the unlocking bit better than CoD, in that as you gain levels you get 'Unlock Points' that you then use to purchase new guns/equipment, rathen than following CoD's set unlock path as you level up.

    Combine CoD's challenges, custom class system, and weapons variety with BF:BC's unlock scheme and I'd be in heaven.

    Arrath on
  • SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    c4tch wrote: »
    c4tch wrote: »
    when i buy a mario game, i deserve to be able to play all the mario levels when first turning it on. I should not have to EARN the ability to warp to the end of the game.

    video games are bullshit

    try scrolling up a post! ok!

    when i play an online RTS, all strategies for all races should be implicitly built into the game so that I am not put at a disadvantage for my lack of experience.

    video games are bullshit.
    strategy guides are supposed to equal units/weapons/classes/characters in this comparison, yes? how, at all, is that supposed to work?

    SithDrummer on
  • c4tchc4tch Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    c4tch wrote: »
    c4tch wrote: »
    when i buy a mario game, i deserve to be able to play all the mario levels when first turning it on. I should not have to EARN the ability to warp to the end of the game.

    video games are bullshit

    try scrolling up a post! ok!

    when i play an online RTS, all strategies for all races should be implicitly built into the game so that I am not put at a disadvantage for my lack of experience.

    video games are bullshit.

    im sitting here in this boring ass class trying to translate this post into realtalk and its not going so hot--is the suggestion that starcraft not coming with a strategy guide with build orders is the same as having to grind achievements in tf2? because that doesnt really make sense?

    start general and get specific.

    here are two games - we've no idea their basis.

    without knowing their types, we can know that both games require experience to gain an implicit advantage over other players. But, you are saying that one game should not be allowed to work in this way, while the other is fine.

    I am assuming you could say starcraft is fine, because it is the most balanced game to ever exist ever.

    but you are saying that TF2 is NOT fine when it operates under identically the same mechanism - through experience, one earns the able strategies to take on opponents in a more dynamic way. In fact, even if someone is given unlockables right off the bat, i 100% gurantee you if you took a player who immediately unlocked his weapons in tf2 versus a player that worked toward unlocking his weapons and neither had any experience with the weapons previously, the achiever would come out on top.

    WOW JUST LIKE REAL LIFE

    c4tch on
    League of Legends: firecane
  • SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    In your strategy game example, you are applying experience to make your standard units more useful. In TF2, you are applying your tangible NEW WEAPONS to a situation where they might be more useful.


    It is really not this hard.

    SithDrummer on
  • scrivenerjonesscrivenerjones Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    c4tch wrote: »
    start general and get specific.

    here are two games - we've no idea their basis.

    without knowing their types, we can know that both games require experience to gain an implicit advantage over other players.

    whups! in tf2 the advantage isn't implicit, it's explicit

    and im not saying this to be a nitpicking shithead but because it gets to the crux of the problem. if every sc race had freakin sweet units that could only be unlocked by playing 5000 matches, or killing ten siege tanks with probes, or whatever, then that would be silly. and it would be a way of artificially (explicitly) giving an advantage to more experienced players, rather than naturally (implicitly) as it is now. which works pretty well in my view

    scrivenerjones on
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Some of the point you raise in the OP:
    Some weapons are situational, it's up the persons playing to decide wether or not this situation calls for that weapon, because someone chose correctly in that situation does not make it overpowered, it makes it the right weapon for that situation.

    Right.

    And the fact that another person doesn't have that same choice makes it unbalanced. If you restrict me from being able to use the "right weapon for that situation," (your words) you've handicapped me as a player.
    You may well have jumped around 1000 times or ran 25 kilometres, but giving retroactive achievements is nigh on impossible, they can't track every little thing you do in order to give you achievements they haven't even thought of yet.

    Right. Which is why I'm saying they shouldn't have tied new weapons to achievements in the first place.
    haha 'why do you think you are entitled to this video game weapon just because you have bought the video game? you have to WORK (in the video game) to EARN that weapon. yeah it might be FUN to use it, but you have to EARN it FIRST'

    that is a very bad and silly way to think in my opinion!!

    Seriously. Yeah, I should come home after eight hours of working to feed myself to grind a couple hours towards being able to play on a level playing field with everybody else in a competitive FPS.


    Am I wrong? Is this not, like, a new thing in FPSes? Seems like I don't remember this kind of thing a few years back. I'll say it again, I avoid MMOs for a reason. If shooting the other guys wearing the other color and capturing objectives doesn't give you enough of a sense of purpose in a game, maybe multiplayer team FPSes aren't for you. If the achievements alone aren't enough to make the game fun for you (well, that and the gameplay) and you need new toys that you've "earned" to make the game fun anymore, then maybe it's time to give it a break.


    Also, the Starcraft comparisons are retarded. Both players have access to the same units in Starcraft (well, depending on race, just like class for TF2). You don't have to "unlock" units by "earning" them. It's a test of one player's skill against another, on a level playing field. Yes, there are "advanced strategies" that an experienced player has access to in Starcraft...there are in TF2 as well! But there aren't "advanced strategies" and new fucking units available to the advanced player in Starcraft, because that would be retarded.

    mcdermott on
  • Ethereal IllusionEthereal Illusion Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Unlocks are fine. Even if they are ones you need to set-up with a friend in your own server so you can burn them while they're lighting a cigarette. If people have awesome guns you don't have, it's not like they're not available to you. I don't even mind if the achievement is incredibly challenging to do. It's the developer's choice to make the game that way.

    There's really no way to justify if it's "the right thing to do," just preference on how you like to play games. Valve might turn TF2 into a pseudo-MMO with weapon drops with better stats. Then that's just how the game will be and some people will like it and some won't. The ONLY issue I see with this is for people who bought the game already under the pretext that the mechanics would never change, but this would be a subject for another topic.

    I wonder how popular a server that has unlocks disabled would be...

    Ethereal Illusion on
    camo_sig2.png
  • Alistair HuttonAlistair Hutton Dr EdinburghRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    c4tch wrote: »
    start general and get specific.

    here are two games - we've no idea their basis.

    without knowing their types, we can know that both games require experience to gain an implicit advantage over other players. But, you are saying that one game should not be allowed to work in this way, while the other is fine.

    I am assuming you could say starcraft is fine, because it is the most balanced game to ever exist ever.

    but you are saying that TF2 is NOT fine when it operates under identically the same mechanism - through experience, one earns the able strategies to take on opponents in a more dynamic way. In fact, even if someone is given unlockables right off the bat, i 100% gurantee you if you took a player who immediately unlocked his weapons in tf2 versus a player that worked toward unlocking his weapons and neither had any experience with the weapons previously, the achiever would come out on top.

    WOW JUST LIKE REAL LIFE

    Are you taking the piss, if you're taking the piss then you've done a tremendous job. If you're serious then you win the stupidest post of the day award.

    Alistair Hutton on
    I have a thoughtful and infrequently updated blog about games http://whatithinkaboutwhenithinkaboutgames.wordpress.com/

    I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.

    Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
  • METAzraeLMETAzraeL Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    In your strategy game example, you are applying experience to make your standard units more useful. In TF2, you are applying your tangible NEW WEAPONS to a situation where they might be more useful.


    It is really not this hard.
    I think c4tch is actually agreeing, since he points out that letting people start with the unlockables doesn't make a difference in the outcome, so there's no reason to make them require unlocking. He just got a little confused about the differences between competitive multiplayer and single-player games.

    METAzraeL on

    dream a little dream or you could live a little dream
    sleep forever if you wish to be a dreamer
  • TyrantCowTyrantCow Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I wonder how popular a server that has unlocks disabled would be...

    unless you take over the valve servers, this is now impossible

    as i undestand it with the 'cloud' or whatever buzzword shit they're using

    TyrantCow on
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Unlocks are fine. Even if they are ones you need to set-up with a friend in your own server so you can burn them while they're lighting a cigarette. If people have awesome guns you don't have, it's not like they're not available to you. I don't even mind if the achievement is incredibly challenging to do. It's the developer's choice to make the game that way.

    There's really no way to justify if it's "the right thing to do," just preference on how you like to play games. Valve might turn TF2 into a pseudo-MMO with weapon drops with better stats. Then that's just how the game will be and some people will like it and some won't. The ONLY issue I see with this is for people who bought the game already under the pretext that the mechanics would never change, but this would be a subject for another topic.

    I wonder how popular a server that has unlocks disabled would be...

    I don't know about "pretext that the mechanics would never change," but the idea of unlockables you had to work to earn didn't even enter my mind when I bought the game (back at launch). And I've been saying this is BS with every class update since.

    It's especially cool with a game that's Steam-only, and with most newer games, in that I can't even sell it if I decide I'm not okay with it anymore.

    EDIT: Not that it's that big a deal...I still love me some TF2...just saying, though, that if I decided it was I'd be SOL.

    mcdermott on
  • Ethereal IllusionEthereal Illusion Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    TyrantCow wrote: »
    I wonder how popular a server that has unlocks disabled would be...

    unless you take over the valve servers, this is now impossible

    as i undestand it with the 'cloud' or whatever buzzword shit they're using

    Well I've seen servers with spies disabled or melee-only. I've even seen an RPG-flavoured one where high-leveled people flew around and shot out laser beams of death. It would seem silly that a weapon restriction would not be allowed. Yet, a quick google search on such a mod yields no results so I can trust this to be the case.

    Ethereal Illusion on
    camo_sig2.png
  • chasehatesbearschasehatesbears Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I don't generally like or dislike unlocks. I don't like the work I have to put in for them sometimes, but I like being rewarded for it and having a goal to work towards. It's not the sort of thing all games should have, but it works for some.

    I don't understand why people seem to get so bent out of shape over this particular subject. Gamers are a funny lot.

    chasehatesbears on
  • Metal Gear Solid 2 DemoMetal Gear Solid 2 Demo Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    haha 'why do you think you are entitled to this video game weapon just because you have bought the video game? you have to WORK (in the video game) to EARN that weapon. yeah it might be FUN to use it, but you have to EARN it FIRST'

    that is a very bad and silly way to think in my opinion!!

    Why doesn't half-life give me the rocket launcher at the start? What is this bullshit about having to play the game!??!
    If you want cases of imbalance, see various versions of Company of Heroes as it went through the patching stages. From overpowered infantry to 1 second artillery that the other side does not have the ability to get themselves
    You have really, really horrible analogy-making skills. I acknowledge that the toll road probably has its fair share of (pot?)holes, but you're talking about one game in which both sides are designed to be different (i.e. not TF2), and another game's single player campaign (again, not TF2).

    I'm comparing neither game to Tf2, but using one as an example of bad balance and another to counter the idea of not being handed everything from the moment of purchase

    I'd hate to say it, but please read posts in context

    Metal Gear Solid 2 Demo on
    SteamID- Enders || SC2 ID - BurningCrome.721 || Blogging - Laputan Machine
    1385396-1.png
    Orikae! |RS| : why is everyone yelling 'enders is dead go'
    When I say pop it that means pop it
    heavy.gif
  • TyrantCowTyrantCow Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    pretty much
    i don't ever want to work in a game, period

    it's suppose to be fun

    i don't mind practicing shit every once in a while; but, don't make me work.
    it's just like my experiences at high levels in MUDs (MMOs whatever)

    TyrantCow on
  • TK-42-1TK-42-1 Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    In BF2142 they have the ranking system based on points gained through completing certain tasks like knifing people and whatnot. This is ok because you can choose what you want to unlock more or less and tailor your classes to fit what you want to do. If i needed a few more points to get a new gun I would just hop on a knife server and rock some dudes for a minute because it was fun to take a break from normal play. Also, if you see someone with a gun you want, you can kill them and take it until you die or switch out again. This is acceptable.

    In TF2, unlockables are set and you have to perform stunts you normally wouldnt do. There are a number of grindy achievements and a number of stunt-ish ones. take your pick. now if I see someone playing with the FaN i would have to spend a lot of time doing shit I dont really care to do to even try it out. that just seems like a lot of bullshit work for a few minutes of 'oh thats cool.' This really isnt acceptable.

    I love achievements to just get some reward for doing shit, but making feel like a chore to gain something takes everything fun out of it.

    TK-42-1 on
    sig.jpgsmugriders.gif
  • SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    haha 'why do you think you are entitled to this video game weapon just because you have bought the video game? you have to WORK (in the video game) to EARN that weapon. yeah it might be FUN to use it, but you have to EARN it FIRST'

    that is a very bad and silly way to think in my opinion!!

    Why doesn't half-life give me the rocket launcher at the start? What is this bullshit about having to play the game!??!
    If you want cases of imbalance, see various versions of Company of Heroes as it went through the patching stages. From overpowered infantry to 1 second artillery that the other side does not have the ability to get themselves
    You have really, really horrible analogy-making skills. I acknowledge that the toll road probably has its fair share of (pot?)holes, but you're talking about one game in which both sides are designed to be different (i.e. not TF2), and another game's single player campaign (again, not TF2).

    I'm comparing neither game to Tf2, but using one as an example of bad balance and another to counter the idea of not being handed everything from the moment of purchase

    I'd hate to say it, but please read posts in context
    Fair enough, the strategy game example works in that frame, but regarding HL how about you look at your post in context? A singleplayer game not giving you every weapon from the start is part of the progression; the fact that you're only facing AI enemies also helps add to the difference. Conversely, a multiplayer game limiting some players' weapons but not others creates an uneven playing field. The rules for one simply do not apply to the other; the differences are too significant.

    SithDrummer on
  • Metal Gear Solid 2 DemoMetal Gear Solid 2 Demo Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    haha 'why do you think you are entitled to this video game weapon just because you have bought the video game? you have to WORK (in the video game) to EARN that weapon. yeah it might be FUN to use it, but you have to EARN it FIRST'

    that is a very bad and silly way to think in my opinion!!

    Why doesn't half-life give me the rocket launcher at the start? What is this bullshit about having to play the game!??!
    If you want cases of imbalance, see various versions of Company of Heroes as it went through the patching stages. From overpowered infantry to 1 second artillery that the other side does not have the ability to get themselves
    You have really, really horrible analogy-making skills. I acknowledge that the toll road probably has its fair share of (pot?)holes, but you're talking about one game in which both sides are designed to be different (i.e. not TF2), and another game's single player campaign (again, not TF2).

    I'm comparing neither game to Tf2, but using one as an example of bad balance and another to counter the idea of not being handed everything from the moment of purchase

    I'd hate to say it, but please read posts in context
    Fair enough, the strategy game example works in that frame, but regarding HL how about you look at your post in context? A singleplayer game not giving you every weapon from the start is part of the progression; the fact that you're only facing AI enemies also helps. Conversely, a multiplayer game limiting some players' weapons but not others creates an uneven playing field. The rules for one simply do not apply to the other; the differences are too significant.
    But it's not like the weapons are beyond your ability to obtain. Especially within the context of TF2, it's not like any of the weapons are difficult or require any kind of skill to unlock, as I've stated if you played any class with unloackable weapons consistently, they're easy to unlock.

    As well, many (hell, all of them) of the weapons are 'side-grades'. Not better than the normal weapons but certainly better in some situations, and even worse in others. You may be out classed if say you're a heavy and a pyro gets behind you, but in many other situations you have the hand up on him. So it balances itself out.

    I think there's a lot of over-statment on what exactly we're talking about here

    Metal Gear Solid 2 Demo on
    SteamID- Enders || SC2 ID - BurningCrome.721 || Blogging - Laputan Machine
    1385396-1.png
    Orikae! |RS| : why is everyone yelling 'enders is dead go'
    When I say pop it that means pop it
    heavy.gif
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I don't generally like or dislike unlocks. I don't like the work I have to put in for them sometimes, but I like being rewarded for it and having a goal to work towards. It's not the sort of thing all games should have, but it works for some.

    I don't understand why people seem to get so bent out of shape over this particular subject. Gamers are a funny lot.

    I don't get why achievements alone can't accomplish the bolded, or perhaps non-gameplay-altering unlocks (like unlockable taunts).

    I love the achievements, and I love it even more now that you can put them on your HUD and get a nice 'ding' when you make progress towards the cumulative ones. Shit's awesome. I guess I'm wierd in that I find the achievements to be their own reward.

    mcdermott on
  • Panda4YouPanda4You Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I don't care for achievements, and I certainly don't like content to be tied to them in games that are not meant to be time-sinks alá MMOs.

    Panda4You on
  • Randall_FlaggRandall_Flagg Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    mcdermott wrote: »
    I don't generally like or dislike unlocks. I don't like the work I have to put in for them sometimes, but I like being rewarded for it and having a goal to work towards. It's not the sort of thing all games should have, but it works for some.

    I don't understand why people seem to get so bent out of shape over this particular subject. Gamers are a funny lot.

    I don't get why achievements alone can't accomplish the bolded, or perhaps non-gameplay-altering unlocks (like unlockable taunts).

    I love the achievements, and I love it even more now that you can put them on your HUD and get a nice 'ding' when you make progress towards the cumulative ones. Shit's awesome. I guess I'm wierd in that I find the achievements to be their own reward.

    Basically your argument is that gameplay-altering unlockables are bad. Now, presumably, you mean because other people having the unlocks when you don't creates an unlevel playing field.

    You have two possible solutions: you can either unlock the achievements legitimately, or you can cheat. If you unlock them legitimately, then you will still be on roughly the same playing field as everyone who plays the class with the same frequency you do, and only slightly below people who play more often, and only slightly above people who play less often.

    Your other option is to cheat. Suddenly, this hella unlevels the playing field because suddenly you have all the unlocks even at a time when people playing legitimately have no achievements. You've made the gap between the haves and the have-nots much wider. In fact, this was your original concern.

    So, even if unlockables are bad, by cheating them you become a hypocrite who claims to want a level playing field but in fact only wants everybody else to be on a level playing field.

    Randall_Flagg on
  • shadydentistshadydentist Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I dislike unlockables in an online FPS, but ever since the ridiculous medic pack all of the TF2 unlockables have been real easy to farm.

    shadydentist on
    Steam & GT
    steam_sig.png
    GT: Tanky the Tank
    Black: 1377 6749 7425
  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Game play unlockables are a stupid idea.

    You want to try to make getting into a game for a new player as easy as possible. It's hard enough for a new player to be fighting people who are better than he is, they don't need better gear too.

    You shouldn't have to put time into a game to unlock things to compete, you should put time into a game to get better and thusly be able to compete.

    It's why MMOs are terrible games for competition, while fighting games are much better (though many have needlessly obtuse controls that act as a barrier for entry for new players, but that is a different discussion).

    Inquisitor on
Sign In or Register to comment.