PC Should repair be changed to fix the game economy?

[RipClaw]

Are you suggesting we should get rid of anything that makes someone frustrated and angry?

No, but it should not remain unmentioned that degradation can cause also frustration. Someone who favors this game mechanic might not think about it.

Do you know Dying Light?

Each weapon has only a limited number of repairs. After that it is broken and you have to find a new one. The intention of the developers was probably that the players should not get used to a weapon. But even in a game where degradation is part of the game, players have started to look for a way to keep their weapons and they have found it. You can do a escort mission and the NPC will repair all your weapons regardless of whether the repair limit is reached or not.

Huh?   I would.   We had degradation in the game before and no one made that argument that I ever saw.  

It was possible to combine parts in the workbench and improve the quality. Therefore the degradation was only temporary. Not permanent.

 

[Kalen]

Each weapon has only a limited number of repairs. After that it is broken and you have to find a new one. The intention of the developers was probably that the players should not get used to a weapon. But even in a game where degradation is part of the game, players have started to look for a way to keep their weapons and they have found it. You can do a escort mission and the NPC will repair all your weapons regardless of whether the repair limit is reached or not.

No, never played it.

I guess I'd just like to hear an argument against degradation with more substance than "I don't like it".   People in favor of it have given some game play driven reasons why its a good idea.... I haven't heard any game play driven arguments against it.

 

[Psychodabble]

I guess I'd just like to hear an argument against degradation with more substance than "I don't like it".   People in favor of it have given some game play driven reasons why its a good idea.... I haven't heard any game play driven arguments against it.

Not sure if serious. Did you really get nothing more from my posts than "I don't like it"? That's either really insulting to me or a bad look on you.

 

[Kalen]

Not sure if serious. Did you really get nothing more from my posts than "I don't like it"? That's either really insulting to me or a bad look on you.

Um yeah?

Your argument, from what I've seen, is that it "feels bad"

 

[Liesel Weppen]

The ideas presented in the first post make it so repairing is more interesting, but in late game when dealing with this on top of sustaining ammo supplies on a daily basis, it would get very old, very quickly.

The FIRST post, yes. That's why i voted "change it but not like in OP, neither A or B".

 Any changes in this area of the game needs to consider the impact on late game, especially in higher difficulties.

Mine does. You can use an item endless, but it requires more planing. And it also does for endgame, which is PERFECT, because in endgame you currently don't need to care for anything, because you have enough resources of everything. There is absolutely no SINK for items. No matter what. Found an item once, you can use it forever. With ABSOLUTELY NO effort, ESPECIALLY in late game.

If you'd need at least a valuable amount of ressources AND planing, there would at least be a little reason to keep playing. Currently there is no reason. There is no sink, you will just pile up ressources higher and higher.

Just started a new game. Found a T4 blunderbus early. So no further care for crafting or repairings until i find shotgun. Good luck at start, but no effort needed to keep it that way. Doh... nothing more to say then just D O H.

 

[Psychodabble]

Um yeah?

Your argument, from what I've seen, is that it "feels bad"

And you don't see a difference between those two things? "I don't like it" is subjective, arbitrary, and possibly transient. What you oversimplified to "feels bad" is objective, durable, and based on established principles of human psychology.

People play games to have fun...that's why the Pimps have decided against your route. If you are really interested in having the academic conversation, you have to approach it with a little more rigor and intellectual honesty, otherwise nobody is going to waste their time typing up arguments that you are going to oversimplify into oblivion, completely misconstrue, or just ignore.

 

[Kalen]

And you don't see a difference between those two things? "I don't like it" is subjective, arbitrary, and possibly transient. What you oversimplified to "feels bad" is objective, durable, and based on established principles of human psychology.

People play games to have fun...that's why the Pimps have decided against your route. If you are really interested in having the academic conversation, you have to approach it with a little more rigor and intellectual honesty, otherwise nobody is going to waste their time typing up arguments that you are going to oversimplify into oblivion, completely misconstrue, or just ignore.

Wow dude.... 

No, "feels good" is not objective.   What "feels good" to one person doesn't necessarily "feels good" to another.   

And catering to only what "feels good" doesn't make a good game.   Games should challenge a person, and sometimes failing those challenges "feels bad", if we followed your logic, we should remove those challenges from the game.

Curious where I haven't been "intellectually honest"?

 

[Liesel Weppen]

And catering to only what "feels good" doesn't make a good game. 

A very prominent game designer once said:

"if you try to make a game suitable for everyone, basically you make a game that suits no one".

- John Roberts, 1938

And that absolutely is the point. Some people here are looking for a loot-shooter with less survival (complaining about you could not use a once found item for ever), other ones look for a "living simulation" (maybe like "the sims") and are asking for e.g. animal taming. Both of them ignoring how this would affect the other "faction" and nobody of them is accepting, that it just might be the wrong game for their requirements. Everybody just wants the game uncomprising just like he wants to have it.

And that is also the reason, why exactly those very very subjective diskussions are just anoying. And they are coming over and over. Looking back for years, there was no single point, that wasn't discussed until everybody puked. But they come up again and again.

New users are the worst. Just bought the game yesterday, played 3 hours, registered in the forums and start complaining about something, just because it is not what they expected and/or they ran into a situation they couldn't handle.

That's also why i absolutely dislike making 7d2d easy accessible for newbies. Doing this makes the game absolutely boring for advanced players (or players that are capable of informing about a complex game).

I can understand why TFP wants to make the game more accessible for casual players from an economical point, but that is also the reason why old players switch to dislike the game. Either you make a complex game, or you make an easy game. There is no way to satisfy both.

And to be honest, most of the complaints, don't show a single point of interest at all. They don't even deal with any mechanics, they just want to have it easy.

Sorry for rage mode, but for me those "complaints" are overally anoying and repeating over and over since YEARs.

It's so @%$#ing anoying, i'd even wish 7d2d had never become that popular.

 

[Psychodabble]

Wow dude.... 

No, "feels good" is not objective.   What "feels good" to one person doesn't necessarily "feels good" to another.   

And catering to only what "feels good" doesn't make a good game.   Games should challenge a person, and sometimes failing those challenges "feels bad", if we followed your logic, we should remove those challenges from the game.

Curious where I haven't been "intellectually honest"?

Reducing the other person's argument to the point of absurdity. Reductio ad absurdum. Classic logical fallacy and either it's being employed knowingly (intellectually dishonest) or unknowingly (rebuttal based on fallacy).

My argument is not against challenge, but I think you know that already. The issue is about how the game approaches the player with that challenge and how failure is couched. There are ways that promote player motivation and ways that undercut it with unnecessarily punitive systems. The punitive aspect of unavoidable item degradation/loss is clear enough, I think.

Please tell me again how this is not objective...

 

[Kalen]

Reducing the other person's argument to the point of absurdity. Reductio ad absurdum. Classic logical fallacy and either it's being employed knowingly (intellectually dishonest) or unknowingly (rebuttal based on fallacy).

My argument is not against challenge, but I think you know that already. The issue is about how the game approaches the player with that challenge and how failure is couched. There are ways that promote player motivation and ways that undercut it with unnecessarily punitive systems. The punitive aspect of unavoidable item degradation/loss is clear enough, I think.

Please tell me again how this is not objective...

I apologize if you think I reduced your argument to the point of absurdity.... but I reread everything you posted in this thread before responding.   And I stand by what I said.   Every point you raised is about how a player feels about losing an item to degradation and that is not, in my opinion, a valid argument against it.

It's not objective because not everyone is bothered about having items that don't last forever.   That is really the crux of the argument.  You (from what I can tell) think items lasting forever is a good thing.  I don't.

As I've said, several times, items having a limited shelf life forces you to choose when to use them.... it forces you to plan to have a replacement item for when it does wear out (either through crafting or through scavenging).  These things are a higher level of engagement than we currently have, which is a good thing (again, IMO)

What benefit (to the game) does having items last forever provide?  Thats what I'm looking for.

 

[RipClaw]

No, never played it.

I guess I'd just like to hear an argument against degradation with more substance than "I don't like it".   People in favor of it have given some game play driven reasons why its a good idea.... I haven't heard any game play driven arguments against it.

This is called confirmation bias. You consider arguments to be more valid that reflect your own opinion. A problem we all have me included.

The Fun Pimps will have had their reasons why degradation was removed from the game. I can only speculate why.

Maybe they had problems to balance it because the number of modslots is determined by the quality. Maybe they wanted something simpler and did not see any added value in it. Or maybe MadMole simply said "I don't like it".

The difference between you and me is that I don't say "I know what would be good for the game". I only express whether I like something or not.
 

 

[Kalen]

This is called confirmation bias. You consider arguments to be more valid that reflect your own opinion. A problem we all have me included.

I dont think thats it at all.   I'm just looking for an argument as to why items lasting forever is a good thing for the game.  

The Fun Pimps will have had their reasons why degradation was removed from the game.

Because Joel didn't like it, is my understanding.

The difference between you and me is that I don't say "I know what would be good for the game". I only express whether I like something or not.

Well, sure, I would like to never run out of ammo.... but that certainly isn't good for the game.

I mean, no one likes negative things added to a game.... but sometimes they are needed.

 

[meganoth]

Not sure when I ever specified blue weapons...

This is about all items, all the time. Even when  the player is decked out in purple gear, the game should create motivation to get out and get more...to get the best possible versions of their chosen gear set...to get perfect rolls on all gear...to grind away at this game without an endgame.

That perfect gear becomes a tangible advantage, no matter how tiny, that the player can justify pursuing. If those perfectly rolled pieces can't be preserved in perfect form indefinitely, they become collectors' items instead of practical parts of the game because nobody would actually USE their perfectly rolled items. If you find something amazing, you should be able to keep it, IMO...if the cost for that is higher than it currently is, that's totally fine, but the possibility would have to exist.

Well, lets assume that the perfectly rolled T3 q6 gear gets an exception, that it doesn't degrade because it is just perfect. No contest from me, I don't care about the "economy" of this game past day 200.

But what about all the qualities inbetween? The long haul before you reach that exalted sphere of tier3 Q6 items? You have a tier2 Q3 weapon and it degrades. While it degrades there is still a Q4 weapon you could find, or a Q5, or even a tier3 weapon. Would you still see the search for better gear suddenly vanish?

 

[RipClaw]

I'm just looking for an argument as to why items lasting forever is a good thing for the game.  

Maybe because it gives the player the freedom to focus on other things instead of always hunting for a replacement?

It doesn't really matter if it's good for the game that you have items forever, as long as it's not bad for the game. And I can' t decide whether something is bad for the game or not. Only the developers can decide that.

Well, sure, I would like to never run out of ammo.... but that certainly isn't good for the game.

No problem. Just don't use guns. Use melee weapons. You might run out of stamina but not out of ammunition.

I mean, no one likes negative things added to a game.... but sometimes they are needed.

That may be the case but this decision, whether it is needed for this game, is not up to us players. It is the decision of the developers. They have the complete picture.

 

[Kalen]

Maybe because it gives the player the freedom to focus on other things instead of always hunting for a replacement?

Ok, but you could use that argument for anything in the game.   Maybe we shouldn't have to have hunger so we can focus on other things instead of always hunting for food.  Maybe our bases shouldn't get damaged so we don't have to worry about repairing it all the time.   Looting and item acquisition is an integral part of the game.   Item degradation keeps those things always relevant.  

Only the developers can decide that.

Sure, but anyone can talk about it.  

No problem. Just don't use guns. Use melee weapons. You might run out of stamina but not out of ammunition.

 

[RipClaw]

Ok, but you could use that argument for anything in the game.

This is possible.

Maybe we shouldn't have to have hunger so we can focus on other things instead of always hunting for food.

Really ? Do you still actively hunt animals in late game ? I am not. I have a garden, plenty of meat from wolves spawning at night and trying to attack my base. Hunger becomes irrelevant after the early game.

Maybe our bases shouldn't get damaged so we don't have to worry about repairing it all the time. 

I need less than 10 minutes to repair the base after the horde. Finding the same item again in the same quality can take a little longer. Especially if it is a T3 Q6 item.

Looting and item acquisition is an integral part of the game.

Just like base building and mining. But still most people only build one base per playthrough and at some point you have so many resources in your chests that you don't have to go into the mine anymore. 

Item degradation keeps those things always relevant.  

And why do the other aspects not have to be kept relevant ? Why do you think it is only worth to keep looting relevant ?

 

[Kalen]

And why do the other aspects not have to be kept relevant ? Why do you think it is only worth to keep looting relevant ?

I don't.   

I agree we get way too many resources.   I'd love to see the amount of food we get turned way down.... I'd love for the kinds of bases that need minimal repair to be eliminated.   

I'm curious what you're doing in your game?   You say you don't want item degradation so you can focus on other things, but you just said you don't have to repair and you don't have to hunt for food.... so what is it you are focused on, if you don't mind me asking?

 

[Psychodabble]

Well, lets assume that the perfectly rolled T3 q6 gear gets an exception, that it doesn't degrade because it is just perfect. No contest from me, I don't care about the "economy" of this game past day 200.

But what about all the qualities inbetween? The long haul before you reach that exalted sphere of tier3 Q6 items? You have a tier2 Q3 weapon and it degrades. While it degrades there is still a Q4 weapon you could find, or a Q5, or even a tier3 weapon. Would you still see the search for better gear suddenly vanish?

No, but it's at that point that the item hunt is most uneven. When you're teetering between relatively high quality T1-2 and low quality T3 is time that it's most important to preserve a player's forward momentum. Why add in a potential setback? Players already make dynamic choices at that point in the game regarding raw stats/stamina drain/functionality vs mod capacity...I don't see that adding degradation is a value positive.

I don't.   

I agree we get way too many resources.   I'd love to see the amount of food we get turned way down.... I'd love for the kinds of bases that need minimal repair to be eliminated.   

I'm curious what you're doing in your game?   You say you don't want item degradation so you can focus on other things, but you just said you don't have to repair and you don't have to hunt for food.... so what is it you are focused on, if you don't mind me asking?

You just want a punishing gamestyle...less of everything. There's nothing wrong with that, but it is significantly different than the direction the game is taking.

Item degradation might be a good thing for your game, but it isn't for the one the Pimps are making.

Minimal repair bases eliminated? What are you doing in your game? What's the point in playing a building game if your cleverness and design skills aren't allowed to play a role? Brute force only and constant struggle don't sound like a fun game to me, but there will definitely be mods to make the game what you want it to be.

 

[Kalen]

No, but it's at that point that the item hunt is most uneven. When you're teetering between relatively high quality T1-2 and low quality T3 is time that it's most important to preserve a player's forward momentum. Why add in a potential setback? Players already make dynamic choices at that point in the game regarding raw stats/stamina drain/functionality vs mod capacity...I don't see that adding degradation is a value positive.

You just want a punishing gamestyle...less of everything. There's nothing wrong with that, but it is significantly different than the direction the game is taking.

Item degradation might be a good thing for your game, but it isn't for the one the Pimps are making.

Minimal repair bases eliminated? What are you doing in your game? What's the point in playing a building game if your cleverness and design skills aren't allowed to play a role? Brute force only and constant struggle don't sound like a fun game to me, but there will definitely be mods to make the game what you want it to be.

You are mistaking what I want from what I think makes a good game.   In a good tower defense, survival game you should never be comfortable.   You should always have to fight for survival.  

 

[Psychodabble]

You are mistaking what I want from what I think makes a good game.   In a good tower defense, survival game you should never be comfortable.   You should always have to fight for survival.  

Yeah, this is a fundamental difference of opinion...I think a good tower defense/survival game should have a difficulty plateau where you are well enough established that you can shrug off the typical threats and go picking larger fights. The only problem this game has right now is that there are no larger fights to pick yet. My current habit is to start making the Blood Moon more and more frequent as the game goes on.