Emmert on Lessons Learned From City of Heroes
By
Aeoleon,
Posted on: 2006-11-01 14:55 in Base Construction
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So... bases aren't fun, but they made it into the game anyhow. But isn't that the reason why the big skills system never made it into the game, being cut before any players had a chance to see and test it --not fun? 
[/ QUOTE ]
Bases were supposed to be fun, and in theory they are. The implication is that no version of the skill system they could come up with would be anywhere near as 'fun', even on paper.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, that is the implication, isn't it? However, I think he means that if they failed to realize this wouldn't be fun in practice, how do we know whether or not their judgement was off determining if the skill system would not increase the fun factor of the game?
As someone pointed out with bases, they justed assumed they knew what the players wanted and designed away. Had they asked first, things may have gone smoother. Maybe if they asked about the skills stuff, that could have worked out.
And Circeus, you liked the Enhancement Diversification change?? All I can say is, that takes away all credibility away from your statements in my eyes. Granted, the idea isn't too bad in theory, but the implementation is far too harsh. I think the diminished returns should be toned down a little... going from 3 enhancements giving roughly 95% and only adding about 20% for 3 more seems too drastic.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good in theory, not so much in reality.
[/ QUOTE ]
Bingo. That pretty much nails our design on bases. We're slowly but surely making additions and changes based on feedback & data. We'll get there...I think bases are a case study where a design didn't mesh well with actual gameplay! For some odd reason, some posters have thought my Serious Games speech blamed the players; heck no! Bases are 100% a DESIGN problem. Not a player problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
So basicly were the testing room for bases and so im guessing they will be all ironed out and the good bases will be availible.... in the Marvel MMO?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good in theory, not so much in reality.
[/ QUOTE ]
Bingo. That pretty much nails our design on bases. We're slowly but surely making additions and changes based on feedback & data. We'll get there...I think bases are a case study where a design didn't mesh well with actual gameplay! For some odd reason, some posters have thought my Serious Games speech blamed the players; heck no! Bases are 100% a DESIGN problem. Not a player problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
If there was a future game plan for player homes/bases/lairs, that'll be great. I know it's been said that players could form their own SG to make a place to call their own, but it's great to have an actual SG (and base) while having one's own private domain.
[ QUOTE ]
Jack was never exactly in tune with City players, at least after launch. Before then, I have no idea ... wasn't in beta. Posi seems to care a lot more about what we want than Jack, who focused on what he personally enjoyed. The latter point is nearly indisputable.
The article was interesting on the subject of bases, though. I had never thought of the design as being sort of "collectively individual," but that explains the whole "Add Personal Item" concept. They made a few mistakes, though. Lots of people, maybe even a majority, don't care at all about base design. I didn't until I inherited ownership of two of them. Although the systems aren't exactly complicated, it's formulas and junk that just doesn't interest a big segment of the City population (just like PvP raiding, actually).
Then there's pricing. Fabrication costs salvage and placement costs prestige, so sg leaders tend to keep base permissions as tight as they can. Base construction is kind of a tight thing. If too many people drop rooms and objects, the result can get incoherent and dysfunctional very quickly. F.ex, my bases have zero decorative rooms; none. Another guy wants a big meeting hall with a huge conference table, though ... just to have it. Never mind it consumes footprint, serves no functional purpose, and we'd never meet in it. We have different priorities.
Good in theory, not so much in reality.
[/ QUOTE ]
And your point is exactly the main problem with bases. You might have 75 people paying for the base... but typically only 1 or 2 that get to spend the "money" and "build" the base. One of the two things (and only two... ;shudder) I liked about Star Wars Galaxies was the housing. It was wonderful to walk into a buddies house and see how it had been decorated and layed out. That housing had no ingame function other than storage, and yet players spent a massive amount of time and resources on the house. This is the problem with bases... And one of the points he made in the speech. Players in CoX don't have ownership of the base. In two SG's I have characters in (one hero one villain) there are fully operational bases. Fully operational to me means that there are Teleporters to as many zones as possible. And that is the only thing a SG does that I see at the moment. I get nothing else out of them. (Game function wise).
I think the answer is simple... use the design of the base building tech to give players individual housing. At a base portal give a choice Base or House... I think players would be very excited even if the individual player housing didn't have a single function.
RP wise? Batman might be part of the JLA... but he still has the batcave. Sups has his fortress of solitude... ect.
Draugadan
My postings to this forum are not to be used as data in any research study without my express written consent.
[ QUOTE ]
I just hope they do it right, in one aspect:
Add a column that also lists a players global address in the sglist.
Hell, even if they never get the 75 person cap "fixed", I'll still love to see that added.
[/ QUOTE ]
I do not want that... or make it optional. I would hate to log on with an alt... and have members of my main's SG wanting to know why your on with a different character. There can be joy in anonymity sometimes.
Draugadan
My postings to this forum are not to be used as data in any research study without my express written consent.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My second concern would be the use of global handles. Quite frankly, at no point in time would I want everybody that joins the SG to get my global id, and I think many others would like to see that privacy ensured as well. If this is done, I hope that the option of creating a SG ONLY chat handle will be included.
[/ QUOTE ]
There would be ways to group SG Membership by global without actually showing the global.
There would also be ways to communicate to someone globally without using the gobal chat. (For example, I think email should be received by the account, regardless of what character you're on.)
but I think the real solution would be to adjust a SG Permission. Ability to see a global would be given out as a permission. That way you don't have to let any new recruit see who you are.
Now, does a new recruit have to reveal their global? Maybe have a personal setting to hide it. Maybe a loss of a bit of anonymity is a requirement for joining a particular SG - just go find a different SG that doesn't ask for it to be shown.
my point is: you have valid concerns. I hope they are factored in to the improvements instead of letting them hold back SG improvements.
[/ QUOTE ]
I love the Mail idea... Yes... global... And... make the mail button turn red only when there is mail that is unread. I hate that read mail saved in the inbox keeps the Mail button red. This is terrible. It should only change with new stuff.
Draugadan
My postings to this forum are not to be used as data in any research study without my express written consent.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good in theory, not so much in reality.
[/ QUOTE ]
Bingo. That pretty much nails our design on bases. We're slowly but surely making additions and changes based on feedback & data. We'll get there...I think bases are a case study where a design didn't mesh well with actual gameplay! For some odd reason, some posters have thought my Serious Games speech blamed the players; heck no! Bases are 100% a DESIGN problem. Not a player problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
Dunno if anyone else said it, but for me, the very idea that I had to purchase CoV after having been a CoH subscriber to get bases left a VERY bad taste in my mouth, and as such, bases, from the get go, were doomed for me.
The other issue for me is that they exist "outside" of the "regular" CoX world and cuts you off from contact with the virtual world. It's not integrated into the world, so why bother?
Just my 2 cents.
[/ QUOTE ]
Again a great point. I remember the rampant speculation on the forums when we were told bases were coming. Specifically I remember a thread topic on Where will you put your base? Most people assumed that bases would be in buildings around town. So that the Darkity Dark SG would have their base in Dark Astoria. Zones have flavor... and SG's could further have flavor by knowing exactly where the base is.
And... no reason that this couldn't be used in at the same time as the current base portals and teleporters.
First time you enter the base you have to go through the "front door", maybe? Use a base portal from any zone with one... or... if your in the same zone as the base... well... then go in the door.
Draugadan
My postings to this forum are not to be used as data in any research study without my express written consent.
[ QUOTE ]
Bases are 100% a DESIGN problem. Not a player problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
Designed and costed on the assumption players would want bases for PvP while it turned out players wanted them for PvE.
This is a song about a super hero named Tony. Its called Tony's theme.
Jagged Reged: 23/01/04
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think bases are a case study where a design didn't mesh well with actual gameplay!
[/ QUOTE ]
That never stopped you from stubbornly sticking to your design and forcing a gameplay change before.
Defense Decrease
Enhancement Diversification
Max Targets per attack
Archvillains
etc.
[/ QUOTE ]
I actually liked those changes.
[/ QUOTE ]
Whether anyone liked it or not is irrelevant. The point is that they made a change to gameplay because gameplay wasn't equalling their design.
They have a history of forcing their design down people's throat despite what the actual gameplay turned out to be.
I've recently been noticing some players with special benefits due to sgs. I even joined one recently with a damage boost. That's a big benefit. However, it seems that's a minority of sgs and most do not have any of these group benefits. I think it would be nice if more, different and lower level easy to get group benifits were available. Even if these benefits were pretty minimal. I now find myself wanting more than just good teleporters in a base.
I also wish there were more/easier temp powers available to make from salvage. Most of my characters can only make one or two at most and the type is minimal like temp knockback resistance.
Last but not least in these post-I5/ED days, it's long overdue for us to get these "balancing" benefits.
<qr>
1) There actually are some nice benefits to having a large well stocked base. The problem of course is that to have a large well stocked base you need to join a large, well established group...which not everyone wants to do, and the base editing is not designed so that a large group can take part.
2) It is funny that after State's acknowledges that there were some flaws on how they designed and implemented the base system...that people are still attacking him on his semantics. Folks, this is why State's doesn't post as much as he used to! He is the designer...not the PR guy. "Real value" vs. "Percieved value"...blah, blah. In a sense, it is ALL percieved value. It is a video game after all, there is nothing real here. He knows what he is working on is a game and entertainment. Therefore what is important is what is percieved by the players. In a sense, the percieved value of a base is really all that matters. State's knows this. He says they didn't design it well. Now you want to beat him up because of the words he used? Give me a break!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bases are 100% a DESIGN problem. Not a player problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
Designed and costed on the assumption players would want bases for PvP while it turned out players wanted them for PvE.
[/ QUOTE ]
Funny thing also, sounds like the devs dont care to PVP in the game yet designed bases for pvp rather then PVE.
The thing that gets me about this whole discussion is that it seems increasingly like two people repeating "No, *you* don't understand" at each other.
Until the promised second look at things like base rent come around, it's unlikely we're going to get specific acknowledgement on specific points - after all, things are still going to be in discussion on the dev end. It's unrealistic to expect otherwise - that's just how the process works.
Don't get me wrong, I'm still concerned that there will be some tangental redesign of bases when what they really just need is a re-pricing, but griping at Statesman's admission of design issues seems kind of counterproductive at this point.
@Mindshadow
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good in theory, not so much in reality.
[/ QUOTE ]
Bingo. That pretty much nails our design on bases. We're slowly but surely making additions and changes based on feedback & data. We'll get there...I think bases are a case study where a design didn't mesh well with actual gameplay! For some odd reason, some posters have thought my Serious Games speech blamed the players; heck no! Bases are 100% a DESIGN problem. Not a player problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would like to say that Statesman has raised his and the other Devs integrity with this statement.
I really like when someone is honest with me and I feel that Statesman tells things like it is. The fact that we can actually talk to him in PMs is a indication that he does not hide from his customers; but is right there with us.
Thank you Statesman for being so honest and up front. You have been known to say things that we did not like. (ED is a prime example) but everything you did and said was to make the game better in the end. I love it that you show us that you and the dev team are not perfect but that togather we are working to make the game better.
Again Thank you. 
OH and Thank you for our WING!!!
Seryphim : Virtue : Empath/Archery Defender
Fueur-Engel : Virtue : Fire/Thermal Corrupter
It sounds to me like Statesman "gets it" W.R.T. the problems with bases, at least if his last post is any indication. How to fix it is another problem entirely, but I'm sure looking through this thread has given him some ideas.
[ QUOTE ]
And Circeus, you liked the Enhancement Diversification change?? All I can say is, that takes away all credibility away from your statements in my eyes. Granted, the idea isn't too bad in theory, but the implementation is far too harsh. I think the diminished returns should be toned down a little... going from 3 enhancements giving roughly 95% and only adding about 20% for 3 more seems too drastic.
[/ QUOTE ]
Dude, I was talking about bases, as indicated by the quote I made from Statesman. But then again, you were responding to Monkey King, not me.
That said... conceptually things were out of control and needed to be reigned in. At the same time I was fighting for some needed buffs (most of which I got, ftr), I was well aware of this. However, I was against three basic things about ED:
1) The crappy explanation of it, and how it worked we were given, to the point where people like myself had to bend over backwards to decode it for the general populace. I mean heck, some of the breakpoints given in the original post are rounded numbers and some are not. That's just bad form.
2) A gradual slope would have been better, and towards 4 SOs, rather than 3 would have worked better as well. It reeks of the typical poor man's math we see from the game.
3) The crappy and underhanded way it was rolled out.
Keep in mind though that it is once again a problem of their failure to treat the player base as customers with feedback. Oh sure, they read stuff, but they don't often listen. Getting them to listen is like pulling teeth.
Had they spent the time to actually have us TEST ED instead of rolling it out 2 weeks after anyone knew about it or was affected by it (since it was in CoV beta, but no one was high enough to notice or catch it), and handled feedback in a sensible manner that involves give and take of a GOOD customer relationship they might have actually come up with something far better.
But they didn't. And I only expect the invention system will be more of the same, since both ED and Bases reek of it.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bases are 100% a DESIGN problem. Not a player problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
Designed and costed on the assumption players would want bases for PvP while it turned out players wanted them for PvE.
[/ QUOTE ]
Some players do want them for PvP. But now bases are over a year old and the PvP part is still not properly functioning. In fact, raiding for IoP's looks like it will never happen.
Maybe most players are just tired of waiting? 
"OK, first of all... Shut Up." - My 13-Year-Old Daughter
29973 "The Running of the Bulls" [SFMA] - WINNER of the Mighty Big Story Arc Contest !
- The Stellar Wind Orbital Space Platform
[ QUOTE ]
Because believe me, States, and I say this with no offense intended... you ain't no Stephen Hawking.
[/ QUOTE ]
Huh. He's not? That's funny, because every time I have my computer's voice synthizer read Statesman's posts, he sounds just like Stephen Hawking!
"OK, first of all... Shut Up." - My 13-Year-Old Daughter
29973 "The Running of the Bulls" [SFMA] - WINNER of the Mighty Big Story Arc Contest !
- The Stellar Wind Orbital Space Platform
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bases are 100% a DESIGN problem. Not a player problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
Designed and costed on the assumption players would want bases for PvP while it turned out players wanted them for PvE.
[/ QUOTE ]
Some players do want them for PvP. But now bases are over a year old and the PvP part is still not properly functioning. In fact, raiding for IoP's looks like it will never happen.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have no doubt that there are very many players that want bases for PvP I am just pretty confident they are the minority.
Designing bases primarily for PvP was a mistake. If they designed them for PvE there would be a greater take up. Then if there was the "option" of doing a bit of PvP with bases you'd find more groups dipping their toes in.
On the same lines I think its a mistake for the CoP to only have PvP reward. They should allow you to pick win something that won't force to to defend you base, maybe like rare components to craft an improved 6 zone telepad.
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe most players are just tired of waiting?
[/ QUOTE ]
Goes without saying.
This is a song about a super hero named Tony. Its called Tony's theme.
Jagged Reged: 23/01/04
Mm...I dunno. I think bases disappointed me mainly because they exist in some sort of limbo. If you had to walk in a particular door in order to get into your base - and if the richer groups could go as far as to purchase a whole building and do up the outside - I think I would dig bases a whole lot more.
As things stand, they are just a convenient way to get around.
[ QUOTE ]
Mm...I dunno. I think bases disappointed me mainly because they exist in some sort of limbo. If you had to walk in a particular door in order to get into your base - and if the richer groups could go as far as to purchase a whole building and do up the outside - I think I would dig bases a whole lot more.
As things stand, they are just a convenient way to get around.
[/ QUOTE ]
As far as a convenient way of getting around, I find it limited to specific teleporters like my current use of going from Founders to Bricks but many times its just as convenient to use the trams or exits. One thing for sure is that travelling 'convenience' definitely does not equate to the effort and cost of obtaining it nor does it really add to my overall enjoyment of a game. When I worked my a$z off for 400K prestige and a relatively large chunk of salvage and ask my leader when we can expect an update to a base.....I get a large fireplace and more decorations with our insignia. Yeah that was fun and worth 3 weeks of no influence.
I agree with Jagged that the bases should have been designed with PvE in mind first. We would probably have more missions for them by now. Much more fun to defend your base each week against a new mob than how the CoP trial is currently working. Random calls from the PPD(for instance, you have to be in the base to see one of these come through) to go out and police a zone for them for a nice prestige/salvage reward would be a great enticement.
Thinking of the JLA satellite, I don't understand why pinpoint teleportation was not available from the start. Even though teleporatation is still boring overall, it would have at least been easier to justify the cost of teleporters and all their associated costs.
And as far as buffs, through many SGs I've yet to use one. Even coalition members don't have them. What does that say about that 'perk' of a base?
What about a special jail cell for villains. How cool would that be to win a mission then hold some of those villains temporarily until the PPD show up to haul them away? Maybe even add a random chance to escape and cause some havoc in your base(and of course holding them successfully until the PPD arrives results in another reward beside the mission bonus that sent them to your jail cell in the first place).
Basically, I grind and grind and grind for a potted tree. There really isn't anything in bases that I really desire and what little is worth having is so astronomical in cost, you will probably be playing CoH2 or MUO by the time you can afford it(even with every member contributing).
I'm glad States recognizes the failure of bases but considering the timeline and the progress of where bases started until now, I have little hope of seeing significant change in any of the upcoming issues. They've been out a year and the CoP is just now barely working, costs are still too high, the utility is still too low, not enough SG only content(mission computer) yet only now they realize they are not living up to the design. Just lower the costs(seems like this should be easy with just a patch), get CoP working and walk away until after I9-I12. Sounds like much better things are in the pipeline than anything bases have to offer.
You know, they could organise base items into several tiers and make the cost of items within each tier go up as you buy items from that category.
E.g. They could put teleporters in Tier T and make the first teleporter dirt cheap. The second one would be a little pricier, then the third even more expensive, and so on. This system would allow even small SGs to have access to a couple of teleporters.
Also, just as we have to choose just two main power sets and stick with them, giving up the goodness of the other sets, there could be a tier of "uber" items that each SG could have only 1 of. Each SG would then have to choose the 1 item that they would most like to have. The pinpoint teleporter you've mentioned sounds like it could go in here. What else? Perhaps an enhancement shop? Mm...a temporary powers shop like those in the PvP zones?
Such additions would not make any SG more powerful in any way, really, but any of these additions would make bases much more attractive to both casual and hardcore players. Convenience, wot.
[ QUOTE ]
As things stand, they are just a convenient way to get around.
[/ QUOTE ]
Kinda like Pocket D.
[ QUOTE ]
I didnt see it either, anyway
-Honestly its news to me that players hate the SG Bases, I dont think I have ran into anyone who hates them, and to be honest, if anything, any complaints tend to be along different lines.
-Not enough functionality, people seem to like the existing functionality , but generally would like more, be it machines that dispense inspirations other than greens, or whatever. Also, people may have more fun if some of the non-active items were more interactive, example, a player clicks on a chair, their toon automatically does an emote of them sitting in the chair.
-Base Raids, this may have been what he has been referring to, people tend to be either solid base raids or solid anti-base raids
-Rent/ Prestige, now this aspect people do tend to dislike, I think most people understand about earning prestige to get stuff, although the prices are sometimes a bit much, but the rent aspect is what gets people turned off on bases, a few points here, the Avengers, X-Men, JLA, Titans, etc., generally speaking while its not mentioned too often, either the government, some foundation, or a wealthy member funds/ donates their HQs, and in case of some of the JLAs HQs such as the sattilites and the moonbase, its was a non issue.
-Simple suggestion here, which might help out small groups
-SG Missions where the SG performs some favor for either Arachnos or Longbow, in return for a base item. For example a hero SG can perform some mission for Longbow, and in return they will give the SG a teleporter unit. Sort of the same functionality as the newspaper mish, with the difficulty of the item affecting the difficulty of the mission.
-A second SG TF/SF, Arachnos/Longbow or some other party, agrees to fund the SG( pay the rent), if they complete some sort of TF/SF for them, or alternatively theyll pay a months rent in return for doing 1-5 missions for them.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hate is a Strong word, no real use for them as of now (no Items of Power) ... Yes. I've Never been in any of my SG/VG bases nor do I see any real reason too so far & I've a top ranked member in my Main's VG and quite active in it.
I would have rather had the time spent on Base put else where, like new powersets, EAT's, Costumes, new Villians Groups, new mission types, Fixing Bugs... of course. But that because they dont interest me, other like them so I dont B**ch.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good in theory, not so much in reality.
[/ QUOTE ]
Bingo. That pretty much nails our design on bases. We're slowly but surely making additions and changes based on feedback & data. We'll get there...I think bases are a case study where a design didn't mesh well with actual gameplay! For some odd reason, some posters have thought my Serious Games speech blamed the players; heck no! Bases are 100% a DESIGN problem. Not a player problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
...make a zone for bases that we can all see and go in. Maybe one half hero one half villain. All problems then = outta the window and game = 2x as compelling!