Will playing as your character increase dungoen traffic? [Archive]

View Full Version : Will playing as your character increase dungoen traffic?

msgnomer

06-16-2012, 03:17 PM

I'm curious what people think. I love the dungeon maker feature and I've always been fine with playing with an avatar, I suppose in part because I think it will be a subset of your character anyway when character playing is implemented. I was happy with the variety of unusual avatars.However, I'm hoping I'm in the minority because if the dungeons don't get a playing boost, there won't be anyone investing design time into making any improvements to an unused feature. No one has been in my first dungeon for weeks, and my second has seen two people besides myself play through in 5 1/2 days. My dungeons aren't unique either as I've been watching the dungeon maker window and I don't see much in the way of likes getting added. Maybe no one likes anything, but I can tell in my case that no one (besides me!) is completing the dungeon either from the tokens I receive. I also see if I boost another worthy dungeon with a pair of likes, I'm as good as putting it in the hall of fame since it jumps to the top and there's no activity to bump it down. Now that is great for a few dungeons I feel were overlooked the first time around, but doesn't bode well for the feature in general.If you don't think playing as your character will boost the dungeon usage much, then do you think there is any feature that would? There are a number of great suggestions for features in other threads, but I don't see any one of them changing dungeon traffic. Will playing as your avatar really turn it around for most people?

retro_guy

06-16-2012, 05:39 PM

I might have another go with my character.I found the dungeons painfully slow for next to no reward. I looklike it would have taken me all day of running dungeons to get enough tokens to buy anything interesting so I never went back after the first couple of attempts.On another note I think they marketed the dungeons totally wrong:When you have something that doesn't fit with the LORE then make it fit the LORE.Make a furniture item that looks like a D&D play table, put one in each bar throughout Norrath. Us the table as the way to bring up the dungeon menu (makes much more sense). When we zone into the "dungeon" we are joining in a game-within-a-game, no player characters are needed as it's a game on a table in a bar.

feldon30

06-17-2012, 06:52 AM

Play As Your Own Character will mildly increase Dungeon Maker traffic in the short term, but I expect those numbers to fall off.As I have posted in a few other threads, the entire customization of a Dungeon Maker dungeon is to place mobs, set up wanderers, and boost the difficulty of an entire room. We cannot place traps, triggers, keys, locks, etc. and we cannot set up encounters, spawned adds, or add any unique abilities to a boss. In short, no matter how pretty a DM dungeon looks, the mechanics are as dull as a butter knife.Until Dungeon Decorator gets some improvements in the creativity allowed (as promised during AoD beta), it will always be a niche feature.

Ahlana

06-17-2012, 08:05 AM

<cite>feldon30 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Play As Your Own Character will mildly increase Dungeon Maker traffic in the short term, but I expect those numbers to fall off.As I have posted in a few other threads, the entire customization of a Dungeon Maker dungeon is to place mobs, set up wanderers, and boost the difficulty of an entire room. We cannot place traps, triggers, keys, locks, etc. and we cannot set up encounters, spawned adds, or add any unique abilities to a boss. In short, no matter how pretty a DM dungeon looks, the mechanics are as dull as a butter knife.Until Dungeon Decorator gets some improvements in the creativity allowed (as promised during AoD beta), it will always be a niche feature.</blockquote>^^ ThisAlso the rewards are lacking.. as there are none. The weapons are junk now, so after the mount, the bag, and the ammo container; there is nothing left to buy. They took off the research reducers which were the only thing to blow your tokens on. And I am unsure why they did since I can get them for free in SS solo zones anyways:/

Cyliena

06-17-2012, 10:40 AM

<cite>Ahlana wrote:</cite><blockquote>They took off the research reducers which were the only thing to blow your tokens on. And I am unsure why they did since I can get them for free in SS solo zones anyways:/</blockquote>You can still get them from the 5 token mystery crate, I got a few a couple of weeks ago that way. Unfortuantely you're more likely to get a lot of vendor trash that way, too.If they don't improve Play as Yourself then the only people that'll be able to do it easily will be level 90+ chars with good DoV equipment. The avatars are severely downgraded under their "level agnostic" feature, so they'll become completely unviable unless you're fighting 1.. maybe 2... mobs at a time, which is annoying. I hope they continue to actually work on it on Test instead of just pushing it live or it'll completely kill DM for me.

intoXILE

06-26-2012, 01:44 PM

One fear I have is the increase of popularity of "grind" dungeons with the Play as your Character feature. I really wish people took the time to appriciate what others are creating, and not just putting sets of 3 mobs in every corner. I don't know about the rest of you, but I take pride in making a fun, well balanced dungeon others can enjoy. However, the most popular dungeons on Oasis seem to be "grind" dungeons, which I just don't understand. Would the rest of EQ2 be any fun if everything was just a grind dungeon without any flavor or creativity?(sorry, just ranting)

Neiloch

06-26-2012, 01:59 PM

<cite>intoXILE wrote:</cite><blockquote>One fear I have is the increase of popularity of "grind" dungeons with the Play as your Character feature. I really wish people took the time to appriciate what others are creating, and not just putting sets of 3 mobs in every corner. I don't know about the rest of you, but I take pride in making a fun, well balanced dungeon others can enjoy. However, the most popular dungeons on Oasis seem to be "grind" dungeons, which I just don't understand. Would the rest of EQ2 be any fun if everything was just a grind dungeon without any flavor or creativity?(sorry, just ranting)</blockquote>As Feldon pointed out, it's hard to take much joy in these dungeons when the encounter mechanics are severely limited. So a lot of people just don't even try and make/play the 'grind' dungeons. If players could make interesting encounters I guarantee you would see less grind dungeons and more well thought out, fun ones.I bet if players had access to better mechanics (adds, unique abilities, traps, triggers, fail mechanics, mob shared health, etc) you would find a bunch of player made encounters better than most developer made ones.

7foggynites

07-12-2012, 01:26 PM

<cite>Neiloch@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>intoXILE wrote:</cite><blockquote>One fear I have is the increase of popularity of "grind" dungeons with the Play as your Character feature. I really wish people took the time to appriciate what others are creating, and not just putting sets of 3 mobs in every corner. I don't know about the rest of you, but I take pride in making a fun, well balanced dungeon others can enjoy. However, the most popular dungeons on Oasis seem to be "grind" dungeons, which I just don't understand. Would the rest of EQ2 be any fun if everything was just a grind dungeon without any flavor or creativity?(sorry, just ranting)</blockquote>As Feldon pointed out, it's hard to take much joy in these dungeons when the encounter mechanics are severely limited. So a lot of people just don't even try and make/play the 'grind' dungeons. If players could make interesting encounters I guarantee you would see less grind dungeons and more well thought out, fun ones.I bet if players had access to better mechanics (adds, unique abilities, traps, triggers, fail mechanics, mob shared health, etc) you would find a bunch of player made encounters better than most developer made ones.</blockquote>Very much doubt that. People have already dressed up their dungeons as much as they can without making it too grindy and even then players -still- pick the dungeons that give higher rewards. Rewards trump story and decor, everytime.At the end of the day, players are willing to spend X time doing a dungeon. If you put too many mechanics in there (adds, unique abilities, traps, triggers, fail mechanics, mob shared health, etc) then they'll go over the time that they've set for themselves to spend in a dungeon. Most players set a time limit that's heavily weighted towards the rewards, not the mechanics. So they'll inevitably pick the dungeons with the least mechanics and the highest rewards. Additionally, many players do not like over-complicated mechanics like adds and unique abilties and traps and triggers and fail mechanics and mobs hared health and whatever else because it's annoying and not fun. This is why most EQ2 soloing does not involve the player disabling traps or dealing with adds or activating triggers. Most soloing in EQ2 is straight forward. And this is what players want. So when they go into a dungeon made by DM, they expect the same and are driven away if it's not.The best dungeons will have close to the highest rewards AND high quality decor/story and a couple (optional) mechanics. Many designers of dungeons in DM keep making the mistake of assuming difficulty is fun. It's not. Rewards AND story AND decor are fun. There's a point where difficulty is no longer fun and it's a bar set so low that you have to be previously aware of it to catch it. Amateur designers miss it.Let me rephrase: Designing difficulty is fun, but playing it is a chore. This is true for 90% of players. It just needs to be reversed so that designers are not aiming for complex mechanics and instead are aiming to please the players. It's about priorities.There're some players that prefer high difficulty but these're the hardcores. They like it not because it's difficult, per say, they like it because of the competition it can breed and also because they have innate advantages in these conditions. Hardcores are particularly hardy in high risk environments. They can sustain repeated deaths and misfortune. This allows them to compete in these conditions where hte mechanics are extreme. Normal players that make up 90% of the population are frustrated by the repeated deaths and misfortune and don't do well in the game and quickly either quit the game or they keep playing it because they're playing with hardcores that help them. Hardcores favor the extreme challenges because of their ability to absorb punishment, basically. You'll tend to find them in "complex" games.For hardcores you just increase penalties for failure and make sure there're lots of ways to fail. A game truly made for hardcores must also ensure that the best veteran players can prevent most of the penalties from occuring. Lots of pain and punishment on the way there.My theory, if you want to call it that, is that hardcores are extreme-gamers and have high tolerance for failure.

feldon30

07-13-2012, 10:57 AM

7foggynites,I could not disagree with your post more if I tried.Kingdom of Sky dungeons were all tank-and-spank turn-and-burn mobs. Nothing unique. No dynamics. No mechanics. Just kill it as fast as you can.Kunark, TSO, SF, Velious, Drunder, and Skyshrine dungeons all have interactivity, scripts, mechanics, tricks, traps, and behaviors that you must contend with.Are you saying that the last 6 years of SOE's dungeon making were not "aiming to please the players" and SOE should have just done grindy tank-and-spank dungeons with no thought or tactics required? SOE doesn't make the dungeons you're asking for. Not anymore. Also, interactive solo dungeons like the Haunted Manor in Loping Plains got rave reviews from players who FINALLY felt they got to do an INTERESTING dungeon without having a group.If all you want is rooms filled with mobs that give the maximum XP for the minimum effort, I have to ask -- Why are you still playing EQ2?

Yimway

07-13-2012, 01:26 PM

<cite>feldon30 wrote:</cite><blockquote>If all you want is rooms filled with mobs that give the maximum XP for the minimum effort, I have to ask -- Why are you still playing EQ2?</blockquote>Honestly Feldon, this is the only thing that would interest me about player made content. Different looking places to grind mobs while leveling toons, instead of hitting the same 4 contested zones over and over.I have zero interest in player made content other than if it offers more variety in scenary as I ae slaughter mobs for xp.If I can't do this in DM, then I don't expect to ever zone into one.Now if there are people that find what they are interesting, more power to them I suppose, so long as we're not losing Sony developed zones for the time spent maintaining and developing DM. They seem to want to make it a very niche product and I don't think they have the resources to cater to so many 'niches'.

7foggynites

07-13-2012, 05:52 PM

<cite>feldon30 wrote:</cite><blockquote>7foggynites,I could not disagree with your post more if I tried.Kingdom of Sky dungeons were all tank-and-spank turn-and-burn mobs. Nothing unique. No dynamics. No mechanics. Just kill it as fast as you can.Kunark, TSO, SF, Velious, Drunder, and Skyshrine dungeons all have interactivity, scripts, mechanics, tricks, traps, and behaviors that you must contend with.Are you saying that the last 6 years of SOE's dungeon making were not "aiming to please the players" and SOE should have just done grindy tank-and-spank dungeons with no thought or tactics required? SOE doesn't make the dungeons you're asking for. Not anymore. Also, interactive solo dungeons like the Haunted Manor in Loping Plains got rave reviews from players who FINALLY felt they got to do an INTERESTING dungeon without having a group.If all you want is rooms filled with mobs that give the maximum XP for the minimum effort, I have to ask -- Why are you still playing EQ2?</blockquote>Yes. If you can calm down a bit and step outside your box for a moment. Then look at EQ2. Is it growing or slowly dying? EQ2 fits a niche, but it's definitely not growing much if at all. It's likely slowly dying. Games that require a lot of investment of time and energy (and $$$) are not popular. Too much interactivity and too many scripts, mechanics, tricks, traps and behaviors is going to annoy a lot more players than it attracts. The fact that SOE still makes some content with these features shows you just how much it's loyal to its customer base. Sadly, or not, its loyalty to its users has costed it a great deal over the years. By being stuck in this niche, it has limited itself to a small pool of consumers that won't grow the company. And EQ2 has stagnated and reached old age. This always happens to games. It's a complex topic, but basically, it gets harder and harder to develop an old game. It's like trying to keep old people young. That's why servers are merging rather than being created. Ultimately, other, newer games, are filling this niche and EQ2 is increasingly on unsettled ground. SOE is getting shaky fingers. I don't think I have to tell you that they got other projects going on with larger potential and more funding.I tell you all this from the perspective of a hardcore player. For years, that's the kind of gameplay I preferred and still it's the type of gameplay I seek. But I don't wear rose colored glasses. I know how much of a minority I am. I also know that big game companies won't throw lots of money at extreme gamers of my type because it's not profitable enough. Too many extreme gamers are either unemployed, in college or young to middle age but they don't have the numbers to compete with the larger casual population.I'm hardcore enough that EQ2 is like a walk in the park. It's still ok, though. It has lots of lore and environments. As long as you control your game, you can really get a lot of value out of it. But it's severely mudflated and it just gets worse and worse with time. If a player is unwilling to control their game, they'll miss a lot of the value that's in EQ2 and at the end of it, wonder why they grind so much.I had to learn to bite the bullet over many years. Every game I played HAD to be hardcore, no question, otherwise I'd rant and rave in the forums. That's how I was. But I'm not the same anymore. I realize now that each game is different and fills a different section in the market. And each section is a different size, with some very large and some very small. From this, I've learned to get what I can out of a game and just accept what it's, realizing that I can't go into a coffee house that sells decaffinated only and complain when there's a coffee house down the street that sells caffinated. It's a waste of breath to complain about something that's not marketed specifically at yourself.To me, a lot of the value EQ2 possesses is in its parent, EQ1. But like all things, EQ2 builds on it and changes some things while discarding others. It's not a perfect thing and it'll never please everybody. It's what it's. Take what you can, but don't get emotionally invested.Overall, I'm telling you that SOE's hands are tied with EQ2. They're dealing with a game that's really too old to invest too much in. It's probably bleeding players behind the scenes. They're looking for ways to pull more players in that's cheap, not expensive. Making complex mechanics in addition to great story and execution tends to require more time and money. They're trying to save money, not lose it. I think it's important how they do it so it doesn't irritate the older and more veteran fan base. Remember, money is the bottom line. Most every company out there is looking for ways to shave their costs and they watch other games and tend to emulate them.If I'm a game company looking for ways to make money and I see that by simplifying mechanics I can pull in more players and make more money while at the same time reducing development costs, what do you think I'll do? That's really how simple it's.And btw, I just got Darklands on Gog. You actually age in that game. Hardcore, compared to todays games. But it has a terribe interface and relies on the old and pitiful save-game mechanic. The problem with these older games is once the designer(s) added a save-game feature it was abused by routinely killing the player. IMHO, redoing savegames breaks immersion. So anyway, Gog is a nice site.(dwarf fortress - another game on my HD)

Mary the Prophetess

07-13-2012, 08:45 PM

Not to put too fine a point on it, but even Ultima Online is still going. I'm sure that if they did not have a sufficient playerbase to turn a profit, then it would fold. A monthly subscription rate of $10 a month with a playerbase as small as 100,000, still brings in a million per month.Market share and subscriptions for both EQ Live and EQ2 have been steady over the last 4-5 years. Just under 200,000 for Eq Live and fluctuating between 200,000 and 250,000 for EQ2. It has fallen off a bit, but not by much.EQ is not a real nich market as far as MMORPGs go. It covers a very broad range of player preferences. It is the niche MMOs say, like Darkfall, that wither, because their focus is too narrow.There is a reason why WoW is the 800lb gorilla of the MMO world. It is because they appeal to a broad spectrum of playstyle preferences.As to time investment vs reward. I once ran a multi server player-made quest in EQ Live. It was *very* complex, and very long. I even had some official help. It ran for two years. There was a quest "cast" of over 24. It was written up on Allakhazams, EQ Druids, The Ranger's Glade, Safehouse, EQ Beatlords and a number of other sites as well as dozens of guild forums.Impressive, right? Wrong. It was a total failure. It was too long, too involved and too difficult for your average 2-3 hour a night player. There are soooo many demands on a players time in these MMOs that time investment is a real factor. There is a reason that most players aren't hardcore raiders, and that reason is time.

7foggynites

07-14-2012, 03:58 PM

<cite>Mary the Prophetess wrote:</cite><blockquote>Not to put too fine a point on it, but even Ultima Online is still going. I'm sure that if they did not have a sufficient playerbase to turn a profit, then it would fold. A monthly subscription rate of $10 a month with a playerbase as small as 100,000, still brings in a million per month.Market share and subscriptions for both EQ Live and EQ2 have been steady over the last 4-5 years. Just under 200,000 for Eq Live and fluctuating between 200,000 and 250,000 for EQ2. It has fallen off a bit, but not by much.EQ is not a real nich market as far as MMORPGs go. It covers a very broad range of player preferences. It is the niche MMOs say, like Darkfall, that wither, because their focus is too narrow.There is a reason why WoW is the 800lb gorilla of the MMO world. It is because they appeal to a broad spectrum of playstyle preferences.As to time investment vs reward. I once ran a multi server player-made quest in EQ Live. It was *very* complex, and very long. I even had some official help. It ran for two years. There was a quest "cast" of over 24. It was written up on Allakhazams, EQ Druids, The Ranger's Glade, Safehouse, EQ Beatlords and a number of other sites as well as dozens of guild forums.Impressive, right? Wrong. It was a total failure. It was too long, too involved and too difficult for your average 2-3 hour a night player. There are soooo many demands on a players time in these MMOs that time investment is a real factor. There is a reason that most players aren't hardcore raiders, and that reason is time.</blockquote>Ultima Online has aged well, but it has still aged and doesn't change what I said.When a company sticks with old products and/or bad execution, it whithers. It doesn't matter if you produce a product for a narrow audience or not. But if you want to make lots of money, you produce for a wide audience and don't stick with old products.WoW succeeds not because it appeals to all different preferences, but because it appeals to the largest common set of playstyle preferences. Honestly, it's very hard to spin WoW as a hardcore gamer's game. You have to try very hard. BUT it can appeal to them in some way because they'll have some common preferences. For example, I could take WoW and have some fun with it. I've played lots of games in my history that fell short of my wishes, but I still played them anyway for different reasons. I compromised and grabbed what I could.Another example of what I mean is sex. Heterosexual men will tend to -all- favor (in whole or part) the female figure. This is a common preference. By meeting this criteria, a potential partner increases their odds of coupling with the heterosexual male. However, beyond this common preference, there're many others. To meet them -all- is futile to even try. Conservation of money and resources ensures it's virtually impossible. So any self-serving company will meet common preferences to make the highest profit rather than to meet them all.I agree that extreme gamers often have a lot of time to play. That's why I said unemployed or college age people tend to fill this population. There're people who hold jobs into their 30's and 40's (maybe higher?) that reside in this segment, but not a lot. Life tends towards increasing demands. And by the time of retirement, people have lost their youthful body, so it's much harder to ever be hardcore again.More time means they can appreciate more complex mechanics. They can absorb more rules and in turn learn how to use them effectively to counter the strategies of their enemies or their obstacles. But I think the point I brought up still remains. I still think hardcores have a higher tolerance for punishment and it's not fully accounted for by time alone. It keeps them in complex games longer and gives them competitive advantage. Keep in mind that in life we often learn from our failures probably as much as from our successes. So tolerating failure is very important. I heard a quote recently that states: "Not all missions have to have a happy ending when the true objective is understanding." The problem with punishment is not its presence, it's its conditions. Punishing too often (no matter the other conditions tied to it) or not allowing the player to efficiently learn and avoid the punishment are the fastest way to kill a game. And this happens to be why permanent death won't work. You can't learn and have a second chance with permanent death without re-rolling as a new character. It's not an efficient learning merchanism. Learning from failure is what makes it all worth it. Without the learning part of punishment, punishment is destructive. (punishment, as used here, is essentially another word for failure. when we fail, we suffer the consequences of that failure)However, please note that because people have different tolerances for punishment in games, depending on time and lots of other factors (intelligence, background, expectations, hand-eye reflexes, brain chemistry, etc), when a game is killed by having too much punishment or not allowing players to efficiently learn how to prevent them is dependent as well. And it's not just about absorbing punishment that makes hardcores unique, but that some of them avoid it in the first place. For example, put a F16/F18 RL pilot in Falcon 4.0: Allied Forces (a very hardcore combat/flight sim) and they'll last longer because they avoid punishment, courtesy of their expansive F16/F18 background.

feldon30

07-14-2012, 06:25 PM

EverQuest II's strength was that it had some depth to it. There was complexity and more than just the shortest distance between A and B. Unfortunately, the frequent changes at the top and poor custodianship has pushed everyone to endgame and people are so impatient with the game, they ask for grindy dungeons. I firmly believe, and you seem to completely disagree, is that EQ2 SHOULD NOT just go with the herd, because there are far better examples of the types of game that EQ2 seems to be copying. Instead, I think EQ2 needs to double down and stick with the high road -- making interesting content that you can't just breeze through but requires some thought. I am not saying that every Dungeon Maker zone should be a jigzaw puzzle or Jenga game, but roomfuls of mobs that you just turn and burn feeds into the idea that nobody wants to really "play" EQ2 anymore, they just grind for rewards. And that makes me a sad panda.

Bjerde

07-16-2012, 01:17 AM

I had tried the dungeons when they first came out, they were really really boring. I didn't play for longer than 5-10 minutes.Since you can play as a character, me and all of the people that I play with are running these now for the charms, helms and other items mostly for alts. The popular ones that give the most Dugeon Marks are so laggy that you can barely play them. So, I would guess that there has been a good jump in traffic, it probably won't stay this busy for long. But, more people are using them now that is for sure.

kdmorse

07-16-2012, 01:58 AM

<cite>Odinn@Blackburrow wrote:</cite><blockquote>The popular ones that give the most Dugeon Marks are so laggy that you can barely play them. So, I would guess that there has been a good jump in traffic, it probably won't stay this busy for long. But, more people are using them now that is for sure.</blockquote>Oh, is that's what's going on? I've been treating it like a network problem, but that didn't fit, as whenever the zone stalled for 60 seconds, I didn't seem to take any damage. But yah, if the zone server stalled... it all fits.Increased dungeon maker traffic? absolutely...Sustainable increase? dunno...Everyone has their own feelings, but Play as an Avatar was a nonstarter for me. Four abilities, three useful at any given time. Not even the most spectacular scenery in the world could make up for that fact while slowly beating mobs to death pressing 1-2-4 over and over. Ooh! AE fight, I get to press 1-2-3-4! I'd rather be playing pac-man. Or pong. It was that pointless.But, being able to play my own character, I'm kinda enjoying seeing what folks have built. Nice change of scenery. Someone put 20 evil eyes in a potted plant, that was kinda fun. I get to be me, preventing a war between gnolls and spiders, by slaughtering both sides until noone's left standing. I spent the evening DM hopping, even on my 92/320, and it kept me entertained.Will it last, well, probably not. But at least it's no longer in the "I'd rather be beating my head against the desk" category that avatars were.

msgnomer

07-16-2012, 02:14 PM

<cite>Ynnek@Kithicor wrote:</cite><blockquote>,,,But, being able to play my own character, I'm kinda enjoying seeing what folks have built. Nice change of scenery. Someone put 20 evil eyes in a potted plant, that was kinda fun. I get to be me, preventing a war between gnolls and spiders, by slaughtering both sides until noone's left standing. I spent the evening DM hopping, even on my 92/320, and it kept me entertained.Will it last, well, probably not. But at least it's no longer in the "I'd rather be beating my head against the desk" category that avatars were.</blockquote>LOL, I think the bold explains something I experienced. It's not so much that "even" on your high level character you enjoy dungeons, its that some designers are now desgining specifically for you!I went into a dungeon with my highest level character, 71 Berserker and died pretty much instantly from huge groups of mobs. The dungeon had multiple likes, so I couldn't figure out what was going on. Occassionally in the past, a prankster would do that on a dungeon and get a friend or two to like it to trick people into an insta-death loop experience, but something about the title/image/initial look didn't seem that way. It seems like that higher level characters can handle this where lower levels cant. No way could my character handle anything remotely close to 20 evil eyes. She isn't even as strong as the average dungeon avatar in the dungeons.I'm happy to hear though that that dungeons are seeing a renewal. Even my non-maximark dungeon has been getting significantly more traffic lately. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" />

Yimway

07-16-2012, 04:25 PM

<cite>feldon30 wrote:</cite><blockquote>I am not saying that every Dungeon Maker zone should be a jigzaw puzzle or Jenga game, but roomfuls of mobs that you just turn and burn feeds into the idea that nobody wants to really "play" EQ2 anymore, they just grind for rewards. And that makes me a sad panda.</blockquote>Thats not all I'm looking for from this game, but it is all I'm looking for from DM.

Mary the Prophetess

07-17-2012, 12:39 PM

I played through the 300 token "MOB Fest" dungeon several times with my 92/320 Berserker. The dungeon claims it takes 90 minutes, and for me it only lasted 30 min. I pulled entire rooms and hallways until there were 50+ MOBS on me, and you couldn't even see my character in the mosh pit.My health never went down 3%, and my power never below 80%. I am geared maybe at teir 2-3 (147-152 stats).At first I thought there's got to be something wrong. I'm just too powerful. Granted these were 92vvv's, but still, 50 at a time?! I tried it again, and simply turned my auto attack on and didn't even use my AE's. much longer fights, but outcome was the same; no damage at all, and eventually my multi-attacks and crits and reposts etc. finished them off.So I had my friend try it with a 71 level Templar. His gear was nowhere near top end for his level. Quested armor and weapons was it. Same result for him. He went through the dungeon with no deaths, and no appreciable damage, although he had more power issues than I had, at times his power was down to less than 10%I think they have swung the pendulum too far in the other direction. From being ridiculuosly hard with avatars, the exact same dungeons are now ridiculuously easy.I see a nerf bat approaching.UPDATE:I ran the same dungeon with the same character twice this morning to see if the patch had any effect. I finished the first one in 36 minutes. No deaths. Health never down more that 2-3% Power consumption increased a bit but never below 60%. The second one was done in 30 minutes, same results. Character's name was Sabarant. 92/320 Berserker. 52K hp, tier 2-3 gear.

Daisey

07-17-2012, 08:07 PM

I'm getting over 300 marks per day on my grind dungeon on Oasis. I'd say yes traffic is up atm. The sad thing is I can run it with my level 80 warden/pally merc combo and get 401 marks in 10 minutes. High 70s low 80s seem to be a "sweet spot" for the auto level dungeon thingy.I had my husband bring in a non 80 char (he used a 91 with sk merc) his merc was doing something like 10,000 - 50,000 per hit, while my 81 pally was slamming with 150,000 - 250,000 occasionally spiking a cool half a million in damage. The run was a bit slower, maybe 15 minutes instead of 10, because the mobs were up arrows. When he brought in a level 79 sk merc it was matching my pally.I know folks have issues with grind dungeons, but if I can get 401 marks in 10 minutes, why do a fluffy creative dungeon and lessen my marks?

Mary the Prophetess

07-17-2012, 08:37 PM

I've never really understood why everyone thinks that the two styles of dungeons are mutually exclusive.

7foggynites

07-18-2012, 01:03 PM

<cite>Mary the Prophetess wrote:</cite><blockquote>I've never really understood why everyone thinks that the two styles of dungeons are mutually exclusive.</blockquote>Probably because it takes extra time to do anything other than AOE a bunch of creatures in one go. For example, if I have to disarm a trap or pull a lever or stop and think then that's time that's lost. At least, that's how it works in DM.Generally, most players just want experience/tokens. Those who want more story or more depth can choose the dungeons that're not made solely for grinding experience/tokens. Even reading a story requires more time that could be spent AOE-ing things.A lot of players use DM to level up and gain aa. That's one reason it's just seen as a way to grind, not gawk.But I think the most popular DM dungeons could still have great story and mechanics. But it only works if players can skip the story and mechanics and get right to AOE-ing. Otherwise, they feel restricted because even the best story or mechanic gets old. For example, the quests in EQ2 are fun the first couple runs through on alts. But after that most players skip them since they've become a grind. Of course, there're so many quests in EQ2 that it's only an issue for veterans. And of course some people just want to be plvl'd, no matter what.

msgnomer

07-18-2012, 01:59 PM

<cite>Daisey@Oasis wrote:</cite><blockquote>...I know folks have issues with grind dungeons, but if I can get 401 marks in 10 minutes, why do a fluffy creative dungeon and lessen my marks?</blockquote>Entertainment?Why do people call any feature of a game they aren't interested in, fluffy? And no, crossing it out and leaving it in doesn't change anything. This is a persistant world game, and why should getting a character to maximum by any means available and then raiding be the only legitimate non-fluffy feature of the game?That said, I do agree the truely grind dungeons and story and "trap" dungeons are pretty much different things. However, I find even the best story-telling dungeon still rewards me - maybe less tokens, but definitely more fun. (yeah, I'm even one of of those that enjoys someone's "pulling puzzle" and crazy maze - it takes all kinds!)