I often see other players pejoratively using the word "forced" when referring to an action they must take in order to receive a reward or benefit.
For instance, another community member had suggested that taverns grant special buffs. To me, this seems like a great idea. But I noticed that some other community members were saying things like, "Why should players be forced to enter traverns to receive this buff?"
Nobody is being forced to do anything. There are incentives and if a player finds a particular incentive compelling enough, then they will freely choose the action required to gain whatever incentivized them. Nobody is forced to kill NPCs; yet, when you begin playing Pantheon, you will find most players freely choosing to kill them. This is because they've all agreed that there's a compelling enough incentive for killing them: gaining experience points. And it wouldn't make much sense for one of them to say, "Why am I being forced to kill NPCs for experience points?" You're free to not kill any NPCs, but don't expect your outcome to be equal to the player who freely chooses to kill them. Likewise, if you don't find the tavern-only buff a compelling enough incentive to enter a tavern, then don't enter any tavern and go about your buisiness. And instead of complaining about not having the tavern-only buff because you freely chose to not enter into any tavern, why don't you just enter a tavern?
I mean, what exactly is the argument here? You understand what needs to be done in order to receive the tavern-only buff, and you've freely decided that it isn't worth entering a tavern in order to receive it. Yet, you're complaining about not possessing the buff. Then you try to make it so other players can't receive this buff, even the ones who would have enjoyed entering a tavern in order to receive it. If this isn't selfishness and laziness, then I don't know what is.
And you see this "forced" argument used time and time again for almost every aspect of MMORPGs: raiding, PVP, tradeskills, you name it. It's obnoxious.
With no reference to the original comment, my guess would be that people who are interested in having the most powerful character would see this as being forced to go to the tavern in order to have the best stats. That would be my best guess.
Alternatively you could say that they are essentially "forced" if they wish to have this buff to go to the Tavern. So looking at it from that perspective they are forced to do that if they want the buff or whatever it is as they assumably can't source it elsewhere.
But I'd agree, its not a good argument to say you dont want to be forced to do somthing that is optional as you pointed out.. its optional. Take it or leave it, thats your options
Hokanu said:With no reference to the original comment, my guess would be that people who are interested in having the most powerful character would see this as being forced to go to the tavern in order to have the best stats. That would be my best guess.
Alternatively you could say that they are essentially "forced" if they wish to have this buff to go to the Tavern. So looking at it from that perspective they are forced to do that if they want the buff or whatever it is as they assumably can't source it elsewhere.
If they don't feel like the buff is worth pursuing, then they should freely choose to not pursue it.
And if a player's main goal is to maximize their character's power, then that means they should be pursuing every opportunity to maximize their character's power, including tavern-only buffs. If they feel like this is too tedious, then I guess they'll be forced to drop their ultimate goal of maximizing their character's power.
manofyesterday said:Hokanu said:With no reference to the original comment, my guess would be that people who are interested in having the most powerful character would see this as being forced to go to the tavern in order to have the best stats. That would be my best guess.
Alternatively you could say that they are essentially "forced" if they wish to have this buff to go to the Tavern. So looking at it from that perspective they are forced to do that if they want the buff or whatever it is as they assumably can't source it elsewhere.
If they don't feel like the buff is worth pursuing, then they should freely choose to not pursue it.
And if a player's main goal is to maximize their character's power, then that means they should be pursuing every opportunity to maximize their character's power, including tavern-only buffs. If they feel like this is too tedious, then I guess they'll be forced to drop their ultimate goal of maximizing their character's power.
Haha, I guess what your describing is exactly the argument that starts to pull at the threads of a game changing it from having challenges to giving you everything :)
I agree with that sentiment, if you want it, you have to go get it and that might be tedius or time consuming, but thats what someone has to to weigh up for themselves. Risk vs reward, time vs reward, patience vs reward not just reward.
It's true that no one would be technically being forced to go to a tavern if there were a tavern-only buff available there, but I think what the poster in that other thread was saying was that, for them at least, they would feel compelled to do something they found tedious before each adventure in order make their character as strong as possible, and having to make that choice would feel like a lose-lose situation. Whether stopping at the tavern before every adventure is worth it is a matter of personal opinion, but I can see how some might feel that a strong buff available only at taverns would come to dominate everyone's pre-adventure routine to the point that it would feel like an artificial mechanic that actually puts the player on rails and takes them out of the immersive world of the game. Also, depending on the nature of the buff, groups and raids might come to expect you to have the buff before heading out to adventure with them, whether you want it for yourself or not. There should definitely be consequences in a good mmo, as well as hard choices to make sometimes, but in my opinion, implementing features that lead to having to choose between undergoing daily tedium/non-immersion or having a weaker character is something that should be avoided. I don't know how many people would like or dislike the tavern buff idea, but if it's something that a lot of people would find tedious and artificial, I can see that being an argument against implementing it, even if people still technically had a choice about whether to utilize it. But it really comes down to how the majority of people (and of course the dev team) feel about it.
Some people play RPGs with minmaxing in mind as a large motivation if not their primary purpose. If they don't achieve the absolute peak of performance then they feel they aren't doing it right or even can't enjoy it.
I believe this is what makes them feel like they are 'forced' to do whatever it is that raises that performance.
No, I don't get it either. For me (and I think most people?) the progression and the content in RPGs is usually done with too quick. I don't usually want to do it 'better' (which usually equates to faster).
Unless you are otherwise seriously hindered in what you can achieve in the game, nothing is 'forced' upon you and I'm yet to hear of an example that would leave me actually 'hindered' without doing it.
Gyldervane said:It's true that no one would be technically being forced to go to a tavern if there were a tavern-only buff available there, but I think what the poster in that other thread was saying was that, for them at least, they would feel compelled to do something they found tedious before each adventure in order make their character as strong as possible, and having to make that choice would feel like a lose-lose situation. Whether stopping at the tavern before every adventure is worth it is a matter of personal opinion, but I can see how some might feel that a strong buff available only at taverns would come to dominate everyone's pre-adventure routine to the point that it would feel like an artificial mechanic that actually puts the player on rails and takes them out of the immersive world of the game. Also, depending on the nature of the buff, groups and raids might come to expect you to have the buff before heading out to adventure with them, whether you want it for yourself or not. There should definitely be consequences in a good mmo, as well as hard choices to make sometimes, but in my opinion, implementing features that lead to having to choose between undergoing daily tedium/non-immersion or having a weaker character is something that should be avoided. I don't know how many people would like or dislike the tavern buff idea, but if it's something that a lot of people would find tedious and artificial, I can see that being an argument against implementing it, even if people still technically had a choice about whether to utilize it. But it really comes down to how the majority of people (and of course the dev team) feel about it.
^
Great post, man.
My first true MMO was Asheron's Call (I debated between that and EQ and made the wrong decision). I stayed a few months and left. What drove me away was the ubiquity of buffbots - you would spend 10 minutes going from bot to bot getting buffs, go out and kill for half an hour, then return for more buffs.
I am not saying that tavern buffs reaches the same level, but it sure brings back memories.
Gyldervane said:It's true that no one would be technically being forced to go to a tavern if there were a tavern-only buff available there, but I think what the poster in that other thread was saying was that, for them at least, they would feel compelled to do something they found tedious before each adventure in order make their character as strong as possible, and having to make that choice would feel like a lose-lose situation. Whether stopping at the tavern before every adventure is worth it is a matter of personal opinion, but I can see how some might feel that a strong buff available only at taverns would come to dominate everyone's pre-adventure routine to the point that it would feel like an artificial mechanic that actually puts the player on rails and takes them out of the immersive world of the game. Also, depending on the nature of the buff, groups and raids might come to expect you to have the buff before heading out to adventure with them, whether you want it for yourself or not. There should definitely be consequences in a good mmo, as well as hard choices to make sometimes, but in my opinion, implementing features that lead to having to choose between undergoing daily tedium/non-immersion or having a weaker character is something that should be avoided. I don't know how many people would like or dislike the tavern buff idea, but if it's something that a lot of people would find tedious and artificial, I can see that being an argument against implementing it, even if people still technically had a choice about whether to utilize it. But it really comes down to how the majority of people (and of course the dev team) feel about it.
Pretty much this. :) Well said Gyldervane!
There's always a balance to be struck between making something fun (so people enjoy doing it) and making it rewarding (so that people want to do it). That might seem wierd to say, until you realize that what's fun for one person isn't fun for another.
For example, I'm a huge crafter, but I absolutely detest "work orders" where I'm making something that's just going to get turned into an NPC and disappear from the game with no visible or meaningful effect on the world - in essence, just a grind mechanism. Many other crafters however don't mind that kind of thing at all and in fact even enjoy it. If the game has a work order system (and I'm not saying it will), if it's incentivized enough I might grudgingly go do it. I'll still be unhappy about it however.
For the taverns thread, it's the same way. Some people love the idea of stopping by a tavern, especially if there's a small incentive (like a buff) for them to go there. Others don't find that activity fun (probably because they feel like it's a waste of valuable time where they could be out adventuring), and resent the idea that if they want the nice buff, they'd have to go do something they don't find meaningful.
There's probably not a perfect solution, but I think when we as a community find these kinds of problems we should all take a step back from the argument and think about what the concept was really trying to achieve, and see if we can come at that goal using a different approach that would still be effective. That's true no matter which side of the argument we're on.
@Gyldervane
Really good post, that's exactly how I feel about some of the optinal content, if I feel that I'm giving up a big advantage then I'll probably go out of my way and do something I hate, just to get that bonus, so if something like this is indeed implemented I hope it's nothing major, because it will more than likely become a requirement before you set out in any adventure, and a chore. For example if it's something like a 5% dmg bonus, that's a buff that can't be overlocked, but if it's a +1 HP regen, or a +1 strength, +1 dex, etc, then it's indeed an optional buff and most groups/guild won't force player to get them.
It's all about balancing and making sure if you pass up on getting a optinal buff, you're not screwing yourself to much by passing up on it, and giving other options to get the same beneffit, for example allowing food buffs with the same effects of taver/inn buffs, that can be used on the go, but have a higher cost when compared to the tavern/inn buffs.
100% agree OP. The "forced" mindset is used as an excuse far to often in many more situations than just what was mentioned. If a player doesn't want to deal with the penalty involved (in this case traveling to a tavern to receive a buff) they shouldn't gain the incentive involved with it.
I don't want to get into specifics here but, this has come up repeatedly in other threads and it seems like it might be the effects of how the mmo genre has been during the last 15ish years. People are used to instant gratification so they are resistant to any significant penalties that might have to be overcome in order to attain benefits.
Everything won't be fun for everyone. There has to be lows that balance the highs to make them feel rewarding.
If P then Q
P
Therefore,
Q
This notion that games must be balanced around players who freely choose not to engage in P in order to receive Q because they're either too lazy or because they just don't feel like it makes little sense to me. The result of following the advice of these types of players is a less challenging and compelling watered-down experience. The current state of World of Warcraft is the product of a long series of changes catering to the whims of these types of players.
Player: "I don't think I should be forced to spend a month grinding to hit level cap!"
Blizzard: "Then we'll make it so it only takes three days! We'll introduce heirloom items that increase experience gained, lower experience requirements in general, and increase the experience gained from quests and grinding!"
Player: "I don't think I should be forced to play such-and-such class in order to gain ability X. Shouldn't I be allowed to pick whatever class I want in order to receive ability X?"
Blizzard: "Sure thing! We'll give every class ability X--or at the very least make sure all classes have an ability that is very close to X."
Player: "I don't think I should be forced to stick to the specialization that I freely chose to select in order to gain abilities A, B, and C. Shouldn't I be able to switch my specialization any time I feel like it?"
Blizzard: "Absolutely! We'll allow everyone the option to switch their specialization whenever they feel like it! Power to the players!"
And so on and so forth, until the game became dumber than a box of rocks.
As for the idea that there should be multiple ways to gain a benefit. Why? And what are the consequences of doing that?
If a person wants to build muscle, then they must eat more protein and lift weights. Even if a person started to take steroids, they must still lift weights before they'll see any gains. Is that unfair? Wrong? Some players seem to think so. "I don't like being forced to lift weights... God should patch reality so that I can gain muscle by just sitting on the couch all day. Not only that, but I should be able to gain as much muscle sitting on the couch all day as the guy who chooses to lift weights. That's only fair." Now, imagine a long series of changes like this. There would be a multitude of ways to achieve X, but the free choices of individuals who are in pursuit of X would become meaningless because X will be obtained regardless of what is decided; all roads would lead to Rome, to use a common phrase. The idea of there being many ways to achieve X only makes sense if these different ways were all around the same level of difficulty and if these other ways made logical sense given what is trying to be achieved. For example, it wouldn't make logical sense for a person to gain as much muscle sitting on the coach as the person who chooses to lift weights and eat healthier. And because the former is much easier to perform than the latter, what would follow is most people choosing to sit on the coach all day in order to gain muscle.
Gyldervane said:It's true that no one would be technically being forced to go to a tavern if there were a tavern-only buff available there, but I think what the poster in that other thread was saying was that, for them at least, they would feel compelled to do something they found tedious before each adventure in order make their character as strong as possible, and having to make that choice would feel like a lose-lose situation. Whether stopping at the tavern before every adventure is worth it is a matter of personal opinion, but I can see how some might feel that a strong buff available only at taverns would come to dominate everyone's pre-adventure routine to the point that it would feel like an artificial mechanic that actually puts the player on rails and takes them out of the immersive world of the game. Also, depending on the nature of the buff, groups and raids might come to expect you to have the buff before heading out to adventure with them, whether you want it for yourself or not. There should definitely be consequences in a good mmo, as well as hard choices to make sometimes, but in my opinion, implementing features that lead to having to choose between undergoing daily tedium/non-immersion or having a weaker character is something that should be avoided. I don't know how many people would like or dislike the tavern buff idea, but if it's something that a lot of people would find tedious and artificial, I can see that being an argument against implementing it, even if people still technically had a choice about whether to utilize it. But it really comes down to how the majority of people (and of course the dev team) feel about it.
Well said, especially about the similarity between forced and compelled.
I think the argument against it was that the OP was wanting a reason for people to gather at taverns, but unless there is something that keeps someone there for any amount of time, it essentially just becomes a stop-and-go buff hut.
Ikasr, I think it was, suggested games and such, which if the OP was after taverns (or any building really) being a centralized place for PCs to gather and socialize, etc, then there needs to be a draw, soemthing to draw them in, and then something to hold their attention for the time span desired to begin casual conversation and socializing.
A small buff might be the outcome of spending an hour playing poker in the tavern, even if that is just something inconsequential like maybe the tavern time, figuring one would be drinking and possible snacking, might slow your food and drink consumption for and hour or so after you leave.
There are many things it could do, but ultimately, I beleive it was more about creating taverns as having a purpose, not just some empty building with a lonely barkeep.
It’s not hard to tell that i for one am on the other side of the argument of being “forced” into doing something, although I am not saying I am forced to.
Looking from an effective PvE standpoint (and even PvP) all I am saying is that it is /almost/ a requirement to (some) to have the buffs from a tavern because it ends up being the best way to do things.
I would like to think most people against this are actually the oppostite of lazy and are arguing the same thing some of you are, we don’t want to easily be spoonfed buffs just for entering a tavern.
A tavern with buffs is no different socially than an Eq guild hall. Most are afk just to receive said buffs. I would rather see a purpose of taverens such as mini-games, buyable drinks or items, quest. The list could go on and on.
Im not entirely against it, as long as it’s balanced I suppose.
I took this as a much wider topic than the tavern buff scenario. We have seen this issue repeatedly in the progeny threads from people who don't want to deal with a harsh penalty to gain incentives.
Again, everything shouldn't be fun. There has to be lows in order to make the highs feel genuine.
When having these discussions we have to be under the assumption of balance. If the tavern buff is crazy OP and you literally can't do anything without it then ok...but I don't think that is what is being discussed.
To say :
they ...a player... would feel compelled to do something they found tedious before each adventure in order make their character as strong as possible, and having to make that choice would feel like a lose-lose situation.
is a very instant gratification point of view. You have the option to run the dungeon without the tavern buff. Maybe you might even want to on purpose to slightly add to the challenge?
What is being discussed actually goes against a tenant of the game:
Lack of action shouldn't be rewarded with benefits.
Iksar said:Why try to make players hang out at a tavern? What benefit is there in that? Sounds more like players would feel somewhat forced into using these locations (or not at all if the buff isn't important) and as soon as they can bolt out of the place they will.
If you want people to hang out in taverns sometimes then add something optional and fun that can only be done in them and let players do that if they want to. Add card games or chess or arm wrestling or something of the like.
Sounds like you are referencing my quote from the Tavern thread.
The point was: why try to force people into using taverns to try and make them relevant to gameplay? Adding a buff doesn't make them social hubs or desired by players, it makes them places players drop in for the least amount of time required before leaving. If the buff is at all meaningful then it turns into a similar thing as the inns in WoW: players go there to log out so when they log in they can get their buff and go (rest exp in WoW).
philo said:I took this as a much wider topic than the tavern buff scenario. We have seen this issue repeatedly in the progeny threads from people who don't want to deal with a harsh penalty to gain incentives.
Again, everything shouldn't be fun. There has to be lows in order to make the highs feel genuine.
When having these discussions we have to be under the assumption of balance. If the tavern buff is crazy OP and you literally can't do anything without it then ok...but I don't think that is what is being discussed.
To say :
they ...a player... would feel compelled to do something they found tedious before each adventure in order make their character as strong as possible, and having to make that choice would feel like a lose-lose situation.
is a very instant gratification point of view. You have the option to run the dungeon without the tavern buff. Maybe you might even want to on purpose to slightly add to the challenge?
What is being discussed actually goes against a tenant of the game:
- An understanding that player involvement is required for progression. All actions (or lack thereof) should have consequences. Positive actions should be rewarded. Apathy or lack of action should not be rewarded with bonuses.
Lack of action shouldn't be rewarded with benefits.
But we also need to keep things in perspective here. The discussions where "most" people don't want to deal with permanent retirement is an entirely valid view, and one that has been recognized by VR. Brad referred to this portion of the feature as a "sizeable hole" and said that he was willing to consider removing that aspect of the feature. I think it's a bit far-fetched to throw out the "instant gratification" argument when it comes to something as important as the deletion of a high level character. Thankfully, progeny is being looked at as a "new feature" for Pantheon rather than a rehash of a feature from another game that most likely didn't require anywhere near the investment of time/effort that we'll be putting into our characters in this game. I don't think progeny would be leveraged anywhere near it's potential if it's a system that promotes "throwaway characters" in a game that requires such a high investment of time/effort. We have had many disagreements on how progeny should ultimately be implemented but at the end of the day, it's already been recognized that permanent retirement is probably too harsh of a cost. Call that an instant gratification mindset if you want but that's the view that has been shared by Brad and it can't be ignored if we're going to have a meaningful discussion about that topic. The tenet you are citing isn't really a good indicator of what's being discussed here because leveling a character to max and then choosing to "not delete it" isn't something that can legitimately be viewed as "apathy or lack of action" based on the reasonable stance that has been shared by Brad as it pertains to that feature. If I'm willing to spend hundreds of hours re-leveling my character to max for a small bonus, that seems like a reasonable cost that doesn't need to be attached to the deletion of a character. Brad alluded to other "costs" such as making gear sacrifices that I think would be much more appealing.
eldrun said:I don’t think you realize that the taveren is ACTUALLY the instant gratification we are trying to avoid For pantheon.
Do you truly beleive going into a building for 5 seconds and leaving is a challenge? A rewarding part of gameplay?
If the buff you get is balanced based on the drawback of having to go into the tavern prior to each group then yes of course. It's a hypothetical example. Don't get bogged down on specifics.
philo said:eldrun said:I don’t think you realize that the taveren is ACTUALLY the instant gratification we are trying to avoid For pantheon.
Do you truly beleive going into a building for 5 seconds and leaving is a challenge? A rewarding part of gameplay?
If the buff you get is balanced based on the drawback of having to go into the tavern prior to each group then yes of course. It's a hypothetical example. Don't get bogged down on specifics.
What drawback is there to walking into a building again?
eldrun said:philo said:eldrun said:I don’t think you realize that the taveren is ACTUALLY the instant gratification we are trying to avoid For pantheon.
Do you truly beleive going into a building for 5 seconds and leaving is a challenge? A rewarding part of gameplay?
If the buff you get is balanced based on the drawback of having to go into the tavern prior to each group then yes of course. It's a hypothetical example. Don't get bogged down on specifics.
What drawback is there to walking into a building again?
I don't care that much about the tavern idea. I do think it's a cool idea, but it isn't a deal breaker.
As Philo said, this thread has more to do with a certain type of player who always uses the argument that X shouldn't be in the game because I don't want to be "forced" to do something. This is a gross simplication of my argument, so for a refresher on my stance, just refer back to my older posts in this thread.
Regardless, I find your question odd because you seem to think there is a huge drawback to walking into a building. So much so that you don't want there to be any incentive for walking into one. Personally, I don't think walking into a building is a huge deal, especially when it will end with me receiving a buff and possibly facilitating a tighter community.
philo said:I took this as a much wider topic than the tavern buff scenario. We have seen this issue repeatedly in the progeny threads from people who don't want to deal with a harsh penalty to gain incentives.
Again, everything shouldn't be fun. There has to be lows in order to make the highs feel genuine.
When having these discussions we have to be under the assumption of balance. If the tavern buff is crazy OP and you literally can't do anything without it then ok...but I don't think that is what is being discussed.
To say :
they ...a player... would feel compelled to do something they found tedious before each adventure in order make their character as strong as possible, and having to make that choice would feel like a lose-lose situation.
is a very instant gratification point of view. You have the option to run the dungeon without the tavern buff. Maybe you might even want to on purpose to slightly add to the challenge?
What is being discussed actually goes against a tenant of the game:
- An understanding that player involvement is required for progression. All actions (or lack thereof) should have consequences. Positive actions should be rewarded. Apathy or lack of action should not be rewarded with bonuses.
Lack of action shouldn't be rewarded with benefits.
Yeah, I totally agree on the larger issue of not wanting the game to cater to instant gratification. I absolutely think players should have to work toward a goal and sometimes make sacrifices before being rewarded. A good example is the death penalty. If your group is pushing toward the end boss in a dungeon and wipes along the way, it’s a setback. No one wants to wipe because the resulting corpse run temporarily derails your group from its goal. But getting your corpses back becomes an adventure in itself, and the payoff comes when you finally overcome that setback and eventually kill the boss. This, to my mind, is very different from many of the mechanics that WoW and other games introduced such as multitudes of repeatable daily quests, grindable weapon and armor tokens, etc., which for many became a chore with no danger or thrill associated with them. This is the sort of thing that I hope never makes its way into Pantheon. But again, I think most of us would agree that the general concept of having to work for your rewards is absolutely a good thing.