Challenging? Or Rage inducing? A question of philosophy

acescracked

Chirus wrote:

...because the main income for d3 isn't cover purchases, it's roster slots.
...

Please provide where you got this data from. Since you have this information you must have access to other internal d3 data metrics. Would be cool to see other purchase percentages and breakdowns.

Thanks.

udonomefoo

Gamora = challenging
Jean TU = rage inducing

Chirus

acescracked wrote:

Please provide where you got this data from. Since you have this information you must have access to other internal d3 data metrics. Would be cool to see other purchase percentages and breakdowns.

Thanks.

Sorry, I misunderstood a post made earlier by IceIX. I obviously do not have any of that data, but thought at one point they said it was the primary source of their income. I went back and looked at the post and saw that it was simply one of the larger sources of income, not necessarily the largest. I still think the question begs to be asked. Sure maybe this truly is a money-grubbing company that will stop at nothing to scrounge every single penny from their playerbase, thus intentionally making infuriating content to compel their players to pay up or lose. It certainly seems to be the perception among the gamers. Could also be that d3 have a poor grasp on game design and could use a second look at their product. I tend to think it's the latter, but I'm possibly naive and too trusting of the good nature of people. I just don't think every small thing in this game has to be an effort by the developers to squeeze money from their players. I believe some parts of their game are genuine and meant to be enjoyed. I think they missed the mark here and hope that this and galactus part 1 are simply anomalies in the grand scheme of things. But sometimes the sheer incredulous product of level design makes you wonder what the heck happened. Hope that clears up the intention of this post for you.

Chirus

As an addendum, I came across this little gem on YouTube. I couldn't agree more with its design philosophy and at least from a thought experiment, it at least feels like it would be able to stand on its two feet. I can sense the fear of bean-counters that are a significant factor of d3 decision-making being portrayed in the second camp mentioned in this video. Anyway, you should check it out. I think it would spark some very good discussions on how to look at game-problems in a broader sense.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhz9OXy86a0

Unknown

Chirus wrote:

As an addendum, I came across this little gem on YouTube. I couldn't agree more with its design philosophy and at least from a thought experiment, it at least feels like it would be able to stand on its two feet. I can sense the fear of bean-counters that are a significant factor of d3 decision-making being portrayed in the second camp mentioned in this video. Anyway, you should check it out. I think it would spark some very good discussions on how to look at game-problems in a broader sense.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhz9OXy86a0

Yeah, although it is kinda tricky to put that in practice.

Like, I can see a bit of Type A (Why spend money?) and Ideal Type in MPQ as is.

You can make a heck of a lot of progress without buying HP or whatnot pretty reliably (until the 4* level, at least), and the things you DO buy tend to be fun little toys. PVE scaleing, for the things people whine about it, does help make sure that there's not much of an arbitary "You must pay money to win" wall, or at least that it's a pretty low one if there is. While buying stuff like direct cover upgrades DOES kinda feel like a celebration. I've only bought one, for Hood's 4th level , and it did feel like a celebration because he finally became a usable toy I abused to many victories since.

But it is trickier to come up with new ways to make it exciting to pay without feeling extortiony.

Like, what if there was a Growth Industries-like PVE event where you had to pay 200 to enter? A unique event with a unique story and a potential prize of a specific 4* cover or a Legendary Token or something like that.

Would that be something you'd be excited to buy?

Chirus

RE colwag: I agree it's tricky, and only few companies have it right and still be free to play. I think the "feel-good-to-pay" model, in order for that to work, the company needs to trust their players to pay for a good product, not coerce them to pay by making content in the game otherwise inaccessible or simply too hard to overcome. This means making competitive content for top tier play available to all players and using vanity items as a means for players to express their satisfaction with the company's product.

I can see how this game could fall into category A, but I see it more heavily leaning on category B. Already in this topic, so many players complained that unless they whaled for the best stuff, certain content in this game becomes unbeatable. That's much more strongly in category B. Yes, you can technically rough it out and play without paying, but the time investment needed to sustain that level of competitive play means you need to be out of a job and simply play all day (grind PVE for HP, play lightning rounds for iso, play PvP for the remaining covers) or you do have a job and simply pay regularly to stay current. I think it's a category B game in disguise as category A. Sure you can enjoy the game for free, but you need to come up with 2000 HP per month in addition to all the shield costs to access covers. That's not a question of difficulty as simply placing an entrance fee for enjoyment. This is more true if you don't have the roster to begin with and you can't get the progression rewards you want within 2 shield hops, making each pvp event an HP deficit than gain.

Unknown

I can't say I've ever felt like MPQ's ever been "Type B" for me, as you just can't buy all that much that helps too much.

Like, the only time where I felt a huge intimidating pressure to buy HP was involving Roster Slots.... and even then, arguably, that'd fit more in the "Ideal" model. You get excited to buy a new slot for a new toy to play with.

I've ran into the near impossible fights and nodes and desires to rank high in PVP, but I guess that the $$$ investment to get straight into 4* Land to become top tier is so high that I don't really consider it a possibility, I guess. Like, I don't feel like I'm just 12 Iron Fist covers away from the game being fun. The game's plenty fun as is.

But also "What IS something you'd be excited to pay for" varies from person to person. Like, I don't think I'd ever be excited enough about any character to just buy a cover for them with real money. But, I'd probably be way more excited to buy into a unique PVE event with interesting rewards and new, fun mechanics. (Like, a PVE that is an Endless Survival Wave that you use your entire roster on or something would be something I'd be willing to drop HP into. Or like, a Super Deadpools Daily Quest or Growth Industries) I don't care about trying to become a top tier PVP player with a maxed Jeanbuster right away. I'd rather have fun, new events instead. (I bought contracts for mini weekly missions in TF2 for tiny useless reskin drops, and loved them for added gameplay event content. I wouldn't be interested in buying a map stamp or a hat directly, though.)

What'd you'd be excited to spend HP on is a tricky question that can go down some bad roads. Like, the video mentioned the money bomb example of "Gives a bunch of stuff to nearby people, but not the person who bought it, who just gets rewarded with good feelings" which makes me just think of stuff like "Buy an Alliance-wide Iso-booster for 8,000 , doubling the amount of Iso everybody in the alliance earns for a month" or something, which I wouldn't be too fond of finding for sale. (Feels more like setting up Bad F2P Model B then anything else in game already)

What sorts of things would you love to see to spend HP on?

Chirus

Hmm... I don't know colwag. By that token, there is no game in existence that would ever fall into category B. As long as someone in the universe enjoys throwing money at that game, it would automatically disqualify it from being category B (because it technically "felt good" to pay for it), even the very games that the video categorizes as strictly B category. This would apply to A as well. It makes all games ideal, and I don't think that's the point of the video. I think there's a better way of classifying this. Does the game require real money currency (i.e. hero points) for competitive progression? If so, then it would fall under category B. As we can see with essential nodes in PVE, (and really the best way to maintain HP upkeep in this game is PVE, not PVP), there is an entrance fee to continue to play this game at a competitive level. Yes, you can make the needed amount without having to pay a cent, but it arguably requires a large time investment that most people forego and simply pay the costs to enjoy. Those games that have set challenges that can either be beaten or bypassed would fall under category A. Not really the meta-game that MPQ provides, but a more solid element like you can finish quest A or pay money to skip it and still get its rewards.
The terminology can make this categorization confusing, but when it mentions "feel-good" type of monetization, it is referring to a transaction system that does not require a real money type currency input to maintain competitive play. For instance, for this type of model to actually fit into MPQ, rosters slots would be purchaseable by iso-8 instead of hero points, and the truly only thing that hero points would buy might be things like alternate hero costumes for current available heroes (in other words a purely cosmetic item), and nothing truly needed to enjoy the game at its fullest. I think that would best define each of those categories objectively. As a business model it's risky, sure, but it really places the quality of the product before money, and customers that feel confident that the product is top notch will support it gladly, be it through vanity items or what have you. MPQ is definitely not that kind of game. They absolutely necessitate HP income in order for their players to continue playing, and furthermore those who input a significant sum of money will have an absolute competitive edge over everyone else. This is clearly seen in players with maxed 5 stars who also don't shield for anything ever. Because of this, developers can afford to make content that's by any standard very poor and it not affect their sales. As someone mentioned previously, the fact that this game is tied to a madly popular brand like MARVEL doesn't hurt, and in fact what likely is keeping this boat afloat. Had this been just an indy title, there's no way in the world that this game with this business model would survive as long as it has.

Chrono_Tata

The real problem with MPQ is that losses are heavily punished, whereas to do well you are expected to keep winning. A challenging game would be, if you lose, you can jump back in the game and try again, without losing out on significant amount of reward. This is why the Gauntlet is so popular. The nodes are difficult, but if you lose, you can try again. The event runs for a week and you don't need to make perfect clears in order to get the top rewards. You can keep trying at pretty much your own pace.

The reason Galactus 1 was so frustrating was if you lose, your entire team is wiped out, forcing you to consume a huge amount of health packs. Locking down the Galactus node after a loss meaning that you are losing out on a ton of points, both for yourself and for your teammates. This isn't even to mention that, from Round 5 onwards, the outcome of a match is pretty much determined by the starting board, which isn't fun at all. The format actively punishes experimentation and risk-taking, which runs completely counter to what most people would expect a fun game to encourage.