PC If TFP wanted natural progression might I suggest they bring back "spam crafting"

[Kalen]

My favorite thing in design of any kind is how all the random people think they can "easily" fix every problem in any system.  Some motherfluffers need to learn about Hoffstadters Law.  Hell, I've been reading how all manual testing will be replaced with automated testing for 15 years now.  All we need is more abstraction!  Yet here I am working QA .

My favorite thing is the random people who think some problems couldn't possibly have any fix that would make the system better than the existing one.

 

[Ralathar44]

If anything, scrap every design flaw there was and keep everything that was working, mostly action skills (weapon damage/handling, block damage, stamina gainz etc). Hell, there was even a popular mod in A18 that did it just fine.

Even the best received games continue to get regular feedback from players about how X/Y system is borked.  "Did it just fine" as a self selected mod experience is alot different than pushing that as changes to the game as a whole.  Additionally each design specification has things it's inherently good at and things it's not.  No one system can execute on everything well even though we, as flawed and emotionally invested human beings, often convince ourselves they can.  But when rubber meets the road and feedback and playtestings comes in different systems are good at different things.

You can pretty much consider LBD and the current perk system to be differently built Dark Souls characters that have different attributes and different specializations.  There may be nothing inherently wrong with either, but both deliver a different experience and the current system delivers an experience closer to the developer's vision.  LBD had a certain satisfaction to how it played and how progressing felt, that was good.  But the current system is very good at making well defined and controlled playstyles that increase replayability and lets you level while playing how you want to.  LBD had problems with grinding being required, being forced to do specific activities to progress and diminishing returns and limits felt wrong, artificial, and arbitrary in a LBD system.  Additionally leveling defensive and medical skills in a LBD system was always going to be problematic because a good player isn't getting swung at or hit much, so you basically have to be intentionally bad to level defense/medical...it's not an MMORPG where combat has guaranteed damage being exchanged both ways.   The current system lacks that same charm/satisfaction of leveling specific things that the old system had and can feel too "gamey" for some who preferred the old LBD system.

There is no best system however.  But, the developers believe the current system is the best system for the goals they want to reach and the steam chart numbers continuing to grow significantly starting at A18 (when they made their significant balancing pass on the new system) strongly supports that their choice was a great one for the health of the game.  Basically everything A18 did was either balancing/polishing the new skill system or building off of it.  While I feel bad for folks who greatly preferred LBD, the change has been a huge success for the game by available metrics.  A 7 year old PVE focused game receiving significant growth is honestly quite the feat achieved by almost no PVE game. 
 

For every post where I read "I'm against LBD because it was a grindfest" I just sigh and move on, because it seems some people can't see past how the whole package used to be, and how that doesn't mean it should just come back as it was. I guess it's a prime example how first experiences matter so much because god forbid things can be improved.

I prolly put 800 hours into the old LBD system.  It was a grind fest, let's not kid ourselves.  As someone who likes grinding, that's still a significant downside for me compared to the new system.  How much of a grind fest it was depended on how you played and what you focused on and what you enjoyed.  As someone who is a base builder at heart, the grind for tool levels wasn't as bad as some other grinds but that's because of numerous exploits like spam anvil crafting > anvil smelting > anvil crafting.  And then exp diminishing returns quite frankly felt like @%$*#! to me.  It felt like I was being punished for doing exactly what the system told me to do to progress.

Personally I would not trade the current system for the old LBD system.  While the old system has it's charms I have many choices of how to spend my time in game now, whereas before you did what you wanted during the day and you spam crafted at night and mined during the day with a little looting here and there if you wanted to progress properly.  Even after exp diminishing returns you just spam crafted a wider variety of stuff.  The quicker you could get to high quality tool/weapons the better your run would go.  Grinding was 100% the most efficient route to getting stronger and that was a foundational part of the system.  Whereas the current system you can basically do whatever you want and progress at roughly the same speed and the progression curve is also much smoother.  Rather than being large dead zones and then massive jumps when you get the next tool/weapon tier level in the current system more of your power is tied into the skills themselves and so your overall progression is much more even now with smaller jumps.

I value being able to spend my gameplay how I want to without barring my progression as well as the smoother leveling curve more than I value the charms of the old system.  So for me it's a large win.  Considering the increased player activity/retention this appears to be the case for most players. 

 

[Ralathar44]

My favorite thing is the random people who think some problems couldn't possibly have any fix that would make the system better than the existing one.

You've missed the entire point of what you replied to compeltely.  Read it again:  "My favorite thing in design of any kind is how all the random people think they can "easily" fix every problem in any system.  Some motherfluffers need to learn about Hoffstadters Law.  Hell, I've been reading how all manual testing will be replaced with automated testing for 15 years now.  All we need is more abstraction!  Yet here I am working QA . "

I never contended that fixes were not possible, I'm criticizing how people think it's easy and demonstrating how even experts in their given field often cannot predict how easy or difficult fixes can be.  This is literally my wheelhouse as QA.  Some of the "easiest" bugs to fix in theory stay on the docket for months, years, or even permanently because they prove to be not so easy to fix in practice.  Hoffstadter's Law, which I referenced for a reason, is nothing about impossibilities and everything to do with estimate time frames and perceived difficulty.

People love to assume coding or balance changes are easy to resolve because people don't work in those industries.  Heck even within the same industry people suffer these same sort of problems with assumptions.  People who are coders of some mobile app thinking they could "easily" fix AI issues in a game when they have no the first clue about the hierarchical systems AIs run off of.

QA will likely one day be automated.  The people who decade after decade say that we will be replaced by automation are almost assuredly correct.  But as it turns out it's actually quite difficult .  Cars will be fully automated long before QA is fully automated at this rate haha.  So the problem isn't the assertion that QA will be automated is incorrect, it's their idea of how easy it is and time frames/resources required to get there.

But on the internet everyone's an armchair expert because they literally do not know how much knowledge in a specific area they lack so everything is "easy" because they lack the knowledge to know how difficult it often is.  Dunning Kruger is a bia bia.

In coding and game design specifically i'd actually content that no problem or fix is impossible.  However the question is the amount of time and resources you need to throw at it.  Some really do end up being easy fixes.  Others require significant work.  Some might require rebuilding other systems.  And some are such a PITA to fix, even if they do not appear to be at the outset, that it would require insane amounts of time and man hours to resolve.  And you have limited $, resources, manpower, time, etc.  And the truly tricky thing is that you can never be 100% sure what category a problem/chance/balance decision falls into.  The only time you can be sure is when it's been successfully execute.  New problems, roadblocks, unintended interactions, etc often don't present themselves until you're mid change/fix.  That's development reality and that's why threads like this exist.

 

[Kalen]

You've missed the entire point of what you replied to.  

Nope, I did not.   As a professional coder, I'm well aware of the fact that things that sometimes seems easy to a lay person may, in fact, be rather complicated problems to solve programatically.   I'm not sure any one in this thread claimed that their suggestions were an "easy" fix.   A lot of people proposing possible fixes, but thats different.

You just came across as very dismissive of any of the proposals.   

 

[Guest]

You just came across as very dismissive of any of the proposals.   

What, you don't like his free lectures on game development and your own psychology?

 

[Ralathar44]

Nope, I did not.   As a professional coder, I'm well aware of the fact that things that sometimes seems easy to a lay person may, in fact, be rather complicated problems to solve programatically.   I'm not sure any one in this thread claimed that their suggestions were an "easy" fix.   A lot of people proposing possible fixes, but thats different.

  Then I was not talking about you .

I'm not sure any one in this thread claimed that their suggestions were an "easy" fix.

You missed it then .  While there have been a few implications one person did say it rather directly.  Though their overall express view is reasonable, presenting both their feelings but acknowledging those of the devs as well.  The following was a the direct quote and obviously the original post starting this thread qualifies at least as an implication .
 

Silly things, easily fixed with a few lines of code. They never bothered to do that though.

Not that I am saying they should have. Their game, their vision.

Our feedback >

Proposals of possible fixes are fine WHEN people present them as POSSIBLE fixes.  When people present them as "this would definitely solve the problem but the devs were too lazy or didn't feel like it" or saying that any specific problem is "easily fixed with a few lines of code" though is where I draw the line.
 

You just came across as very dismissive of any of the proposals.   

Did you read the original post that started this conversation?  If we want to talk about dismissiveness then quotes like  "honestly I feel like TFP just enjoys ruining the game more and more" is pretty high up there on that scale and directly at odds with the game's actual performance.  That's the tone this conversation started in and was continued with comments like "easily fixed with a few lines of code".   I AM somewhat dismissive of arguments presented in such a manner, quite so.  It doesn't mean there cannot be some feedback of value there, but it definitely lowers the odds significantly and it's a very poor and self sabotaging way to conduct the proposals.
 

tl;dr : just because LBD wasn't working in some areas doesn't mean the whole system had to be scrapped; we could have kept the working parts of it and supplement it with the current system.

Comments like this I don't have a problem with.  Though I'd say that it doesn't properly acknowledge the limitations of the old LBD system it is constructive and it is not incorrect either.  The old system COULD have been further refined and added to.  But there would have still been foundational tradeoffs in that system that the new system solves for.  I've been very clear that I consider the two systems a tradeoff with neither definitively better or worse on paper while acknowledging I prefer the new system and I explain why.  But the main reason I've expressed that the new system was a good choice is because it grew the game significantly after years of playerbase stagnation.  The proof is in the pudding as it were.

 

[Lorca]

Skyrim has learning by doing. What happens is people just grind the hell out of the parts they dislike

<snip>

So, let them. What's it to you?

 

[RestInPieces]

Proposals of possible fixes are fine WHEN people present them as POSSIBLE fixes.  When people present them as "this would definitely solve the problem but the devs were too lazy or didn't feel like it" or saying that any specific problem is "easily fixed with a few lines of code" though is where I draw the line.

Please don't misconstrue what I said... TFP didn't bother to balance it because they decided that LBD does not fit their vision, so they replaced it instead of fixing it. There's nothing wrong with that, it's their baby, even if I personally did not like that decision.

As for the fixes themselves I am not talking about the LBD system as a whole. I am talking specifically about what SylenThunder mentioned. LBD was implemented with hardly any regard for balance, which is perfectly understandable since the game is in development. But it's not rational for us to judge LBD by easily fixable, with, yes, a few lines of code, issues like e.g. getting skill points by hugging a cactus. 

 

[Ralathar44]

LBD was implemented with hardly any regard for balance...

Citation needed lol.  Whether the balance was there or not and whether there was any regard for balance are two entirely different things.  I'm sure untold hours went into trying to better balance the LBD system.  Even the worst balanced systems in gaming often have alot of work and love put into them, they just didn't work.  And true, maybe they could have worked better or even potentially flawlessly in some alternate timeline in the hands of different devs, it's always possible.  There are enough Overwatch, DOTA, League of Legends, MMORPG, etc balance complaints to sustain internet salt for like 50 years for instance .  All of those games are still top tier games (about a dozen top tier MMOs)

But based on the information we have today, especially as people outside of the studio with no idea of the internal problems with the system they faced, I feel it'd be overstepping my bounds quite a bit to claim there was hardly any regards for balance unless they directly stated that themselves. (which i'm not aware of them saying)

 

[Kalen]

Even the worst balanced systems in gaming often have alot of work and love put into them, they just didn't work. 

Didn't work?    It worked well enough from A13-A15.   It wasn't perfect, true.... but I wouldn't say it didn't work.   LBD fit the "vision" at one point.... and when spam crafting became a thing, rather than try to mitigate that perceived problem they changed the "vision".   Which is certainly their prerogative.

edit:  Ok, I'm sure they tried to get rid of spam crafting without trashing LBD.... it just doesn't feel like they tried that hard.

 

[Ralathar44]

Didn't work?    It worked well enough from A13-A15.   It wasn't perfect, true.... but I wouldn't say it didn't work.   LBD fit the "vision" at one point.... and when spam crafting became a thing, rather than try to mitigate that perceived problem they changed the "vision".   Which is certainly their prerogative.

We're in complete agreement that their attempt fix to spam crafting felt rally bad.  I disliked the random diminishing exp alot and IMO it was a far worse experiential problem than the spam crafting.  I liked LBD myself.  That being said, I'm someone who likes grinding.  Heck I'm an altaholic in MMORPGS .  LBD's downsides were minor impediments to me.  That being said they were much larger impediments to others and so my opinion on LBD goes beyond just how I feel personally for my own play.

Fortunately for me I liked many different styles of play so when LBD was switched out I held fondness for it but I looked to the new system without prejudice and.....it was very lacking in A17.  Skill/perk system in A17 vs LBD and IMO LBD was better hands down.  The original A17 implementation of the current system was pretty rough and the balancing rollercoaster of A17 was real.  But I understood that was first pass....but still dealing with the rough version of it for a full TFP development cycle was wearing and I don't blame people for being frustrated.  Without so much new stuff to play with it woulda been way worse because the state of things was not where it needed to be.

However that foundational potential really paid off in A18 where they brought it far closer to a complete version of itself.  And here where we stand with A19 I honestly do believe they have eclipsed the old LBD system pretty definitely at this point, again because their changes are bearing massive fruit in a greatly increased playerbase/retention.
 

edit:  Ok, I'm sure they tried to get rid of spam crafting without trashing LBD.... it just doesn't feel like they tried that hard.

Again, I don't know all of their internal testing but I'm pretty sure they put significant internal efforts towards it.  The amount of things that get worked on internally and then scrapped without the player ever knowing is super high.  Examples we DO know about are the behemoth and ziplines for example.  Thiose kind of attempts > cuts are super common in game development.  Sometimes even entire games with tons of investment in them get cut, like Starcraft Ghosts.  For every Starcraft Ghosts you know about there are like 100 more that happened you never knew existed in various stages of completion.  Much less individual features and balance change attempts.

 

[Kalen]

Heck I'm an altaholic in MMORPGS . 

15 lvl 120 WoW characters and another 11 110-119!

 

[Ralathar44]

15 lvl 120 WoW characters and another 11 110-119!

So you too feel my pain .  I had 36 separate City of Heroes characters at one time, many of them engaging in the Incarnate system.   Speaking of, City of Heroes has had private servers for some time now.  "City of Heroes Homecoming" .  Both City of Heroes and Warhammer Online just absolutely refuse to stay dead haha.

 

[RestInPieces]

Citation needed lol.  Whether the balance was there or not and whether there was any regard for balance are two entirely different things.  I'm sure untold hours went into trying to better balance the LBD system.  Even the worst balanced systems in gaming often have alot of work and love put into them, they just didn't work.  And true, maybe they could have worked better or even potentially flawlessly in some alternate timeline in the hands of different devs, it's always possible.  There are enough Overwatch, DOTA, League of Legends, MMORPG, etc balance complaints to sustain internet salt for like 50 years for instance .  All of those games are still top tier games (about a dozen top tier MMOs)

But based on the information we have today, especially as people outside of the studio with no idea of the internal problems with the system they faced, I feel it'd be overstepping my bounds quite a bit to claim there was hardly any regards for balance unless they directly stated that themselves. (which i'm not aware of them saying)

Yes, perfect balance in a mmorpg or a moba is pretty much impossible and most embrace that and end up changing the meta regularly to keep things interesting.

I think it is safe to say that some aspects of LBD, like the examples Sylen mentioned or spam crafting, were not implemented with any regard for balance and, other than scrapping spam crafting and configuring rates, LBD did not get any major changes before it was scrapped. Of course I don't blame them for not balancing it out of the box -- that would be absurd, since there's no reason to waste too much time on balance when your systems are subject to change in the next alpha.

Besides the fact that player behaviors that LBD caused had literally become a meme, if untold (or any significant amount of) hours of balancing had gone into it and they were invested in that system, how much of a chance would there be, that they didn't think to add any deterrents, for example, a simple check in my earliest cactus example? That would only be a first step, but it seems they were convinced that no amount of steps would be enough to balance a LBD system in a clean way. Among other staff comments, I remember arguing with MM, who was saying that "even Bethesda couldn't do it". The consensus was along the lines of "it was more trouble than it's worth". And they simply ended up following a different plan.

I can't rule out the possibility they encountered some kind of insurmountable obstacle that we don't know about, but the examples people like to use (the behaviors mentioned earlier) are most certainly not such a thing. Which is why I replied the way I did.

The interesting part is that some of the LBD problems would have already been solved with systems that have been implemented after it was scrapped. The injury system, death penalty or the degree basic needs have changed since A16, zombie loot etc etc -- item economy in general -- would have deterred much of the asininity that LBD caused.   

 

[ArcadeAndrew115]

Skyrim has learning by doing. What happens is people just grind the hell out of the parts they dislike

Sneaking, crafting, jumping, enchanting, etc. People simply refuse to do things they don't like, and the whole experience is best summed as: "Ugh, when can I go back to doing fun bits?"

Experience system allows people to do whatever they like to do, and shore up the parts they don't like, which supports the parts they do like. For what it's worth, as much as it doesn't make sense for someone to get good at gardening while blowing undead brains off, it makes sure people are doing what they want to do, not doing what they have to do

Because they've already done the latter during work hours

except now the game is boring, because its all perk based, and you still have to grind exp, and the only real way to get exp is kill zombies.... when before that was helpful to level up, but you still could get exp from crafting

Negative to the OP and to bringing back LBD. LBD = a grind fest, which is boring. 

The current system is much better than the old LBD.

so grinding zombie kills is better? game sure is fun now that I have to kill zombies to level up...said no one ever

EDIT: I should say that the game was still playable and fun prior to a19, now it literally is just a grind fest to get my gamestage higher so I can actually find good weapons instead of a blunderbuss in every gun safe.

I literally just try and rush as many big POIS the first 7 days and rack up as many kills as possible in order to get my gamestage higher so ill be able to find a shotgun.

the point is this natural progression nonsense made the game feel more grindy than ever, I dont want to spend a whole 3 in game days clearing a large POI only to get a @%$*#!ing blunderbuss if I havent made my gamestage higher yet

 

[beHypE]

I think the biggest issue right now is that A19 shipped only half the solution. The new slow progression is fine if it's shipped with raised gamestaged POIs and biomes. You can either take your time and play safely while finding tons of stone age items, or you can take the risk and go for a harder place in order to find better items straight away. The system as a whole is very promising to be honest, but A19 has some people frustrated cause it lacks the latter option. 

 

[Solomon]

the point is this natural progression nonsense made the game feel more grindy than ever, I dont want to spend a whole 3 in game days clearing a large POI only to get a @%$*#!ing blunderbuss if I havent made my gamestage higher yet

Also it doesnt feel natural at all because you are not actually slowly progressing but are forced into stages till the game decides that you can now find guns in the safes what since the begining only gave you stone age tools.

 

[RipClaw]

Also it doesnt feel natural at all because you are not actually slowly progressing but are forced into stages till the game decides that you can now find guns in the safes what since the begining only gave you stone age tools.

It doesn't feel natural, but at least crafting is viable once again. When you find everything you need, and in better quality than you could craft it, then crafting is pointless.
 

 

[katarynna]

Also it doesnt feel natural at all because you are not actually slowly progressing but are forced into stages till the game decides that you can now find guns in the safes what since the begining only gave you stone age tools.

I would say finding q4 stone tools to replace your q1 and finding a blunderbuss to add another ranged option to your primitive bow and such is the definition of slowly progressing.

Finding guns in safes is not slowly progressing, it is a big jump in power. 

You can argue that gamestaged loot feels too artificial, or that you want the power increase that guns give on day 1 instead of day 6-7. But arguing that obtaining guns in the first couple of days equals slow progression doesn't make sense to me. Better primitive items for several days before you start finding guns and higher tier tools is definitely slow, steady progression.

 

[Xtrakicking]

It doesn't feel natural, but at least crafting is viable once again. When you find everything you need, and in better quality than you could craft it, then crafting is pointless.
 

Why do you think crafting wasn't viable? In previous versions, I always crafted my own tools before finding any in loot. It's true that guns were found more often than crafted, but then they could've made it so loot yields weapon parts instead of full guns.

I would say finding q4 stone tools to replace your q1 and finding a blunderbuss to add another ranged option to your primitive bow and such is the definition of slowly progressing.

Finding guns in safes is not slowly progressing, it is a big jump in power. 

You can argue that gamestaged loot feels too artificial, or that you want the power increase that guns give on day 1 instead of day 6-7. But arguing that obtaining guns in the first couple of days equals slow progression doesn't make sense to me. Better primitive items for several days before you start finding guns and higher tier tools is definitely slow, steady progression.

It is slower progress, but only because the game is literally forcing that slow progression upon the player. It's also a problem that a gun store and a loot stash from a random house's attic will give you the same primitive stuff, which you can craft anyways. In my opinion, if they don't want players to find guns so early on, they should either guard gun safes and the like more heavily, make them harder to access or make them yield gun parts instead of full guns.