Torchlight 2 insights into D3 skill system

[Raesene]

Totally. I find it funny that if you put a current gamer in front of a game like King's Quest or Space Quest or something. Or Zork. They'd just sit there with no idea of what to do. Creative thinking just isn't part of these current games.

That reminds me of the Roberta Williams (creator of King's Quest) quote:

Back when I got started, which sounds like ancient history, back then the demographics of people who were into computer games, was totally different, in my opinion, than they are today. Back then, computers were more expensive, which made them more exclusive to people who were maybe at a certain income level, or education level. So the people that played computer games 15 years ago were that type of person. They probably didn't watch television as much, and the instant gratification era hadn't quite grown the way it has lately. I think in the last 5 or 6 years, the demographics have really changed, now this is my opinion, because computers are less expensive so more people can afford them. More "average" people now feel they should own one.

It was a whole different world back then. Puzzles in adventure games sometimes even required knowledge of specific literary references to solve. Now a days, designers don't even go so far as too assume that players are capable of reading at all.

[Flux]

I'm giving out 15 TL2 keys today and tomorrow via posts to a thread in our TL2 forum. No link; finding it is your first test to prove that you are worthy.

Tons more keys are going out via our main site and Incgamers as well.

[Doppel]

Now use your powers to delete your post so that i have a chance at a beta key for once. keitahnkxsbai

[BellaStrega]

yes, it's hilarious. which is why this site is full of lulz.

modern day player: WTF! i don't get it. why isn't this game playing for me? do i have to actually play the game? F#ck that! this game is broken. there's no win button.

Now that's a straw man if I ever saw one. I don't see much difference between modern gamers and long-time gamers, except that the latter sometimes comes up with a variety of "In my day, we had to play Ninja Gaiden uphill in the snow. Both ways."

It is true a lot of modern games are easier than they were in the past, but this is part of gaming evolution, and is actually a good thing, in terms of accessibility and commercial viability. No one's going to ever complain that games aren't playing themselves, but they will complain (and rightfully so) if the game does not provide enough feedback to tell you what you are doing.

I've been playing video games since the late 70s, for what that's worth.

[Darkmere]

Now that's a straw man if I ever saw one. I don't see much difference between modern gamers and long-time gamers, except that the latter sometimes comes up with a variety of "In my day, we had to play Ninja Gaiden uphill in the snow. Both ways."

It is true a lot of modern games are easier than they were in the past, but this is part of gaming evolution, and is actually a good thing, in terms of accessibility and commercial viability. No one's going to ever complain that games aren't playing themselves, but they will complain (and rightfully so) if the game does not provide enough feedback to tell you what you are doing.

Wisdom.

/10char

[mr punk]

Now that's a straw man if I ever saw one.

pro tip: it's not an argument. it's called sarcasm.

It is true a lot of modern games are easier than they were in the past, but this is part of gaming evolution, and is actually a good thing, in terms of accessibility and commercial viability.

yet, you mention nothing about quality. also, accessibility and commercial viability isn't my concern.

No one's going to ever complain that games aren't playing themselves, but they will complain (and rightfully so) if the game does not provide enough feedback to tell you what you are doing.

yeah, i guess that what designers get for assuming they're designing games for people of average intelligence or good impulse control.

[BellaStrega]

pro tip: it's not an argument. it's called sarcasm.

What's the point of making an assertion about people that is untrue? Even if you're being sarcastic, you're not making a real point. You're just looking for a reaction.

yet, you mention nothing about quality. also, accessibility and commercial viability isn't my concern.

Pointing out that I didn't mention quality is simply a poor attempt at a "gotcha!" on your part. Quality is a concern, obviously.

While you may not consider accessibility and commercial viability to be important, anyone who wants to publish a game and make money with it needs to take these under consideration. A lack of commercial viability means the game won't make enough money, which is a terrible way to operate a business. A lack of accessibility means fewer people will play, or will persevere after attempting to play.

yeah, i guess that what designers get for assuming they're designing games for people of average intelligence or good impulse control.

Good impulse control isn't a character trait, but a matter of neurological development. Someone who is impulsive isn't impulsive because they choose to be, but rather because that is likely how their brain functions. Similarly, intelligence is not a matter of personal merit but also a matter of neurological development.

However, I assume that designers are designing games for people who want to play them, and realize that they may attract a wide variety of gamers and playstyles. I suspect many also understand that fostering an elitist, snobbish attitude among the fans is actually counterproductive.

Maybe I Wanna Be The Guy is more your thing.

[mr punk]

Pointing out that I didn't mention quality is simply a poor attempt at a "gotcha!" on your part. Quality is a concern, obviously. While you may not consider accessibility and commercial viability to be important, anyone who wants to publish a game and make money with it needs to take these under consideration. A lack of commercial viability means the game won't make enough money, which is a terrible way to operate a business. A lack of accessibility means fewer people will play, or will persevere after attempting to play

quality is a concern? really? yet, you keep babbling about accessibility and commercial viability. again, not my concern since i'm not publishing a game nor do i buy games on that basis. also, you're not presenting or "educating" me with a new argument or information. again, this is why this site is full of lulz. others communities had this discussion years ago. welcome to 2012 diablo players. here's a recap of the last 12 years.

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/arti...6052924268.jpg

However, I assume that designers are designing games for people who want to play them, and realize that they may attract a wide variety of gamers and playstyles. I suspect many also understand that fostering an elitist, snobbish attitude among the fans is actually counterproductive.

well, that didn't take long. i was wondering when the E-word was going to inevitably drop as it usually does in this type of disscussion. also, it has nothing to do with "an elitist, snobbish attitude among the fans". designers in the past always made games for large casual audiences just like today. the difference is they know a lot more about modern audiences than they used to much like the movie industry knows that movies with giant robots, laser beams and explosions will appeal to a certain large demographic which leads to massive box office sales.

[BellaStrega]

quality is a concern? really? yet, you keep babbling about accessibility and commercial viability. again, not my concern since i'm not publishing a game nor do i buy games on that basis. also, you're not presenting or "educating" me with a new argument or information. again, this is why this site is full of lulz. others communities had this discussion years ago. welcome to 2012 diablo players. here's a recap of the last 12 years.

I'm not "babbling" about anything. I am simply not cooperating with your attempts to twist my words.

I do not see why you would think such ideas are news to anyone here. But then again, I don't see any kind of argument in what you're presenting. You seem to be more focused on sarcasm and insults, which suggests to me that you don't have an argument or even a coherent stance.

well, that didn't take long. i was wondering when the E-word was going to inevitably drop as it usually does in this type of disscussion. also, it has nothing to do with "an elitist, snobbish attitude among the fans". designers in the past always made games for large casual audiences just like today. the difference is they know a lot more about modern audiences than they used to much like the movie industry knows that movies with giant robots, laser beams and explosions will appeal to a certain large demographic which leads to massive box office sales.

It has everything to do with those attitudes among fans. I made no claim that game designers have ever only designed for elitists, but many such players do seem to think that games exist mostly - if not strictly - for their benefit. Your response is barely relevant to what I wrote, or even the rubbish you wrote previously that I responded to.

[raveharu]

Punk is from the elbozo-permaximum-mattypie trinity, just to let you know