Let's begin with an explanation of what grinding is in a video game. Grinding is essentially any repetitive task using the same strategy over and over again to advance in the game. So let's talk about why it's importa- no, it's not important. At all. It's a silly mechanic that was put in place by every MMO designer -ever- for the sake of two things.
A.) To increase the time and disparity between lower level and higher level rewards.
B.) As a brutal means of influencing players to spend money for reduced grinding.
That's the basis of it in and of it's entirety and you can beat around the bush all you want but inevitably that's what it comes down to, one or both of those aspects. Every game has some form of grinding, some are absolutely terrible with it's execution (RuneScape) and some are actually pretty creative with it (FF-XII).
So what separates a "good" grind versus a "bad" grind? Execution and implementation. If it's actually enjoyable it's hard to consider it grinding, such is the case with Final Fantasy XII (as mentioned before) in which you're given a 'chain' for killing the same mob repeatedly (maximum of 999). This 'chain' will give you better rewards as you progress and actually leaves you with a sense of "I wonder what I'll get next" for those that are patient.
On the other hand... We have Dust... Which is the epitome of grinding. Apart from the miniscule amounts of SP we obtain through passive accumulation, the only way to gain SP/ISK is through matchmaker grinding. This effectively turns the most innovative and inspired shooter to hit the Playstation 3 into the most advanced lobby shooter with -potential- to become the greatest console FPS of all time.
What we have is a system that rewards players for in-game combat in which the weak get powerful and the powerful get more powerful -in the same area-. There is no point to it. It's repetitive, dull and ultimately disruptive to the game's overall health due to damaging the general balance between new and old players. Without more innovative content to provide some sort of meaningful engagement, the game swirls in place without moving.
Some may say that PvE content (drones) will aid to this, but I severely doubt that it will as it will just add a "co-op" shooter aspect to the game that... you guessed it... is just grinding, without the human element behind the mind of the opposition. There needs to be some sort of -reason- for it all, as the game suggests in many of it's advertisements and media outlets.
The very closest means of obtaining that reason are Factional Warfare and Planetary Conquest, both of which are inherently flawed for various reasons. Planetary Conquest is reserved for the top tier players who already have enough ISK to be able to compete in Planetary Conquest as it is very difficult to get a foot hold with a Starter Pack of clones. This goes right back to grinding as, wouldn't you know it, to get to PC Capability you need to have 16 players who have spent enough time grinding to be able to field the necessary gear to be competitive.
Factional Warfare is flawed in that it allows anyone to participate - removing the disparity between the two players entirely - and it gives you no means of meaningful interaction with Eve Online other than implication. A corporation can fight for a faction and work hard as the dickens to turn a planet over entirely in their faction's favor but given as there's no way to control -WHAT- planet or district you're going to, it's far too easy to have it immediately flipped again. You're not only forced to fight in an area that the game decides, you're also at the mercy of available slots if you're in a squad or multiple squads.
Of course, this will be changed whenever CCP Implements the overhauled FW matchmaker which will allow entire 16 man teams to deploy together but the fact still remains - there's no way to control where you're going. Anything you accomplished that night can be immediately undone because of this. Beyond that, there's no way to see the impact you're even making given that there isn't enough information being provided (what faction owns the system the planet is in, how well they're doing, what impact the districts your faction possesses is making etc etc). With that in mind, you can kiss meaningful interaction goodbye.
So that leaves us with Instant Matchmaking - Hi-sec, in other words, and I don't need to give a long drawn-out explanation of all the issues surrounding this part of the game and why it's absolutely lacking.
The content that this game needs should be meaningful and have long lasting effects. Drone warfare isn't going to solve a damn thing and Planetary Conquest is just... Broken.. It has the same exact issue as Eve Online in that large alliances/power blocs control everything and if you're going to make it there you have to be able to field similar gear, similar numbers and meta-game the dogshit out of the system (that means using ALL the cheap tricks, formerly Flaylocks/Contact Grenades) to be remotely competitive. Otherwise you're going to be stuck in a perpetual state of timers.
My best suggestion is to make EVERYTHING matter. Faction Warfare shouldn't just be a match maker with some subtle if not vague impact on Eve Online that no-one really notices. It should actually mean something to the players who are participating, giving benefits for the faction who controls the most territory - as it does in Eve Online. If Faction Warfare is more beneficial than your Instant Matchmaking, there might be a migration of veteran players toward it as it's more rewarding. This doesn't mean "nyeeeh higher isk rewards" - I think there's plenty of room to work something more unique in there. We already have enough ISK generation.
Factional Warfare needs to provide Dust players the information they need to see what kind of impact their making - the percentage differential on the solar system's capture status. The solar systems in which Eve players have conquered for their particular faction, etc.
We need to think outside of the box - rather than just tacking on more "grind" content to the game we need to implement more engaging features. Things that players WANT to do and while I'm sure "shooting someone in the face" is a great answer, there are a vast amount of games that include "shooting someone in the face" in their list of features.
The answer to this needs to be innovative - something unique to Dust 514 that no other game has. We have an amazing starting point and it's been sitting there for over a decade: Eve Online. What ways can we actually make Dust 514 more interactive with Eve Online and what ways can we do it that make the interaction meaningful and engaging without the repetitious bull that every other game already provides (better in some cases)?
The answer is simple: Player Driven Content. The development team simply cannot keep up with the fluctuating masses. It's impossible, why? Because everyone has a different opinion - but that difference in opinion is an AMAZING conflict driver and where you have conflict you will inevitably have some sort of social interaction. This is something that CCP cannot influence and should make no effort in attempting because it would be unnatural.
What they SHOULD do, on the other hand, is provide the tools necessary to make those social interactions readily available and plentiful. This is exactly what Eve Online hallmarked on and is what it is known for. There's been a few MMO attempts who've tried to dive into Eve Online's niche role but inevitably failed because they didn't grasp the core concept of player driven interactions.
Here's a video (the highlight of my argument) I'd like everyone to watch to help understand what's going on with Dust 514 right now and how we can make it better for the future. Turning it from Operant Conditioning (playing for a reward we know we will get, I.E SP/ISK) to Player Immersion and Engagement (playing for the novelty and experiences we craft for ourselves):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbtAn3dic-g#at=394
No comments:
Post a Comment