Mr Sables
Posts: 597
10/25/2017
|
Sir Frederick Tanah-Chook wrote:
And stop bloody complaining every time something in the game becomes more difficult or limited.
I haven't read the rest of the thread yet, but isn't that a little harsh?
I think people have a right to constructive criticism, or even complaints, considering that a lot of time and/or money is invested into the game, and it's one in which many people are passionate about (I don't really know any other games people play continuously over a period of years, or whom people debate and theorise and contribute so much toward as a community). But to be more on-topic:
Wasn't a part of the problem for the previous incarnation of Hallowmas that it got progressively more difficult each year, too, to the point it penalised and prevented new players from doing well, while end-game players just learnt to communicate better and cheat the system with newer and more improved methods? So the gap between the player-base got wider, while the game sort of achieved higher levels of difficulties? As one who only experienced one former Hallowmas incarnation, and is no way in hell notability grinding this year or last . . . I didn't really notice, but it seems like - if this is a sort of precedent - it could end up with the same problems as the old incarnation?
Like . . . what happens by the time we get to 15 Notability to grind a confession?
It doesn't feel like a fair difficulty/limitation to me, because it's a grind that just widens the gap. Early/Mid-game people just find it more and more difficult, to the point they might give up or be entirely unable to do it, while end-gamers can easily go it (with a bit of a moan) and will just end up learning how to grind MW easier for next year (or work out a system/spreadsheet for doing MW social actions to get higher notability) and . . . it just seems a flawed system to me.
*hands up in surrender*
To be fair, if I've spoken anything wrong or out of line, I'm just an observer here, as I haven't done this particular grind for confessions, as I said. Apologies if I've spoken out of line.
|
|
|
+19
link
|
Diptych
Administrator
Posts: 3493
10/25/2017
|
Failbetter aren't idiots - they aren't going to make the game comically difficult. And when players get bitter and argumentative every time difficulty is revised upward, devs are faced with the choice of a game that can only remain static or get easier, or a community that's perpetually furious.
--
Sir Frederick, the Libertarian Esotericist. Lord Hubris, the Bloody Baron.
Juniper Brown, the Ill-Fated Orphan. Esther Ellis-Hall, the Fashionable Fabian.
|
|
|
-9
link
|
Anchovies
Posts: 421
10/25/2017
|
I do think "Notability grind!" is the wrong way to go about making something difficult while giving late-game players a bit more leverage. Flash Lays with multiple venture difficulties, Forgotten Quarter expeditions with varying supply costs and rivals, short stories with scaling rewards, quirk challenges, and so forth. Renown is currently a big enough system to be getting unwieldy, and probably shouldn't get many more uses than it already has.
--
Perhaps our role on this planet is not to worship God — but to create Him.
—Sir Arthur C Clarke
Lionel Anchovies. Character on indefinite hiatus.
|
|
|
+11
link
|
Mr Sables
Posts: 597
10/25/2017
|
Sir Frederick Tanah-Chook wrote:
Failbetter aren't idiots - they aren't going to make the game comically difficult. And when players get bitter and argumentative every time difficulty is revised upward, devs are faced with the choice of a game that can only remain static or get easier, or a community that's perpetually furious.
I partially agree.
This might be derailing the thread a bit from its purpose, but I do think the issue is less "increase in difficulty" and more "difficulty on a sliding scale". I'm probably using the wrong term, but it's late for me and I'm sleepy, so what I mean is this:
Notability is something exclusive to mid and endgame players. Most of those players never really go above five, and - when they do - it's usually for a larger grind like for lodgings or changing speciality. Those very endgame players have a choice to sacrifice notability now or save it for their grind, which is a fair choice and not one that's irreversible. They also tend to have high BDR, so it's - again - doable. The increase in difficulty is fair for them and proportionate, and I don't think really it's deserving of complaint more than a grumble.
Beginners were locked out from the start, because they aren't POSI. Fair or not fair? Another debate, but the point is nothing's changed for them, so this year is the same as the last . . . no harm, no foul.
Now . . . mid-gamers?
That's a massive jump, and one that might not be doable at all. It's very difficult to get to 5 when you have low BDR, when you aren't quite at a point to get special items from the Iron Republic or yet able to pay fate for the Owl or whatever else. So it's punishing mid-game players by moving boundaries; before it was "you can do this" and now it's "sorry, you can't do this". The difficulty spike doesn't affect the beginners, while it's either 'fun' or an 'inconvenience' to end-gamers, but mid-gamers? Yikes. It's tough. So it feels vastly unfair.
I think these kinds of things work better when everyone can access them (and work more on a scale).
The Zee Festival relies more on quirks and luck, with ways for beginners to increase quirks. Christmas has advents for all and the ability for all to grind lacre, with an added extra of the noman for end-gamers. The Election has unique mechanics and social interactions. The Rose has a frustrating reliance on RNG, but all can participate equally. If you pay Fate, it's for extras that you can't otherwise get (everyone's again on equal playing fields). If you increase the difficulty, whether in quirks or RNG or whatever else . . . everyone's affected equally, as they all are able to grind or keep retrying and they all have the same free options available (your fate only works on the exclusive stuff, if I remember right, not as a means to get items ahead of everyone else on the free-level).
This is where this Hallowmas differs to me. You can use fate to get ahead and get all free items, if you wanted, leaving people who can't pay fate unable to get the same as you, which doesn't seem fair . . . and you also entirely cut off beginners from getting extras, which also doesn't seem fair . . . and then - the following year (unlike the Zee Festival), you immediately bring out a new slew of Companions (giving no one a change to catch up), put a huge amount behind a pay wall (cutting off those free players from formerly free companions, again unlike Rose), and then decide to up the ante for mid-game players, putting them at a disadvantage, too. It's easy to get a bit grumpy, as it's heavily geared to fate-payers (fair enough, except they're not paying towards exclusive, but a whole base range) and also to end-gamers (which are probably few and far between).
So yeah . . . disproportionate difficulty.
|
|
|
+13
link
|
John Moose
Posts: 276
10/25/2017
|
I do agree that it's pretty early to declare the festival Totally Ruined Forever from one change after one day of it starting, and postponing judgement until we really see how the festival works this year around could be a generally helpful attitude - maybe "this is what I didn't like this year" instead of "this is what I don't like and it needs to be changed now."
On the other hand, I'm a confused as to what would be a better place for people to voice their disatisfaction than a thread for it that no one has to check if the subject doesn't interest them, and a bit taken aback at the message of "stop complaining."
|
|
|
+18
link
|
Diptych
Administrator
Posts: 3493
10/25/2017
|
(For the record: yes, obviously constructive criticism is fine. But the forum rules regarding good conduct still apply.)
--
Sir Frederick, the Libertarian Esotericist. Lord Hubris, the Bloody Baron.
Juniper Brown, the Ill-Fated Orphan. Esther Ellis-Hall, the Fashionable Fabian.
|
|
|
0
link
|
PSGarak
Posts: 834
10/25/2017
|
I'll echo something I said about the Last Constable & Cheery Man: a lot of how players feel about things depend on expectations as much as they do the actual thing that was delivered.
It's absolutely FBG's right to say that completionism, while possible for certain insane folks, was not intended as a realistic goal and they are aligning the festival to make completion as unrealistic as they originally intended. That's fine. I could be on board with that.
If that is the case, the criticism I have is about communication. For better or worse, last year's version of this festival set the expectation that completionism was accepted and viable. I even got the player quality recognizing it, which to me communicated that FBG hoped and expected me to achieve it.
The only communication we got about any changes that might be happening this year is the phrase "structurally similar." So to find on opening day that the content has been rebalanced to three times harder to get the same thing, but also there's actually more to achieve beyond that, violates the expectations that have been set.
Now those expectations were set implicitly, and may not have been what FBG intended in the first place. And I get that, and that's fine. That's why I say my issue is with communication. FBG has even said, directly, that they make the Noman harder each year to keep up with player achievement. And that's fine, because they communicate that, and they explain that the difficulty and exclusivity is very much the point of the content.
That communication has not happened here. We simply get something that is harder, with no previous indication that FBG was dissatisfied with the balance of the previous experience. That is the thing that is sharp and jarring and causing disappointment.
--
http://fallenlondon.com/Profile/PSGarak
|
|
|
+15
link
|
Hotshot Blackburn
Posts: 110
10/25/2017
|
Sir Frederick Tanah-Chook wrote:
Failbetter aren't idiots - they aren't going to make the game comically difficult. And when players get bitter and argumentative every time difficulty is revised upward, devs are faced with the choice of a game that can only remain static or get easier, or a community that's perpetually furious.
Something about this doesn't sit quite right with me. The forums may be a vocal minority, but just telling people to cool down without responding to the source of why they are furious is unlikely to have much of an effect at this point in time. Once Failbetter comes out with an official response, I suspect things will simmer. Better to let people stew than try to prematurely clamp down.
By the sounds of your comment though, static and making the game easier sounds preferable to making a perpetually furious community. It doesn't sound like Failbetter wants the latter either, so I'd be a bit surprised if things don't get clarified or changed depending on how extensive complaint is outside the forum.
Also, folks, it's literally day two of a two week event. I don't like the changes, and if this isn't followed up on I'll get a bit more peeved, but like...we have no idea why these changes are made, and I have enough faith in the game that there will be explanations for why these changes are made.
--
Hotshot Blackburn: Messidor, Aspirant to the Calendar Council. Paramount Presence. Seeker of the Name. A firm believer in kindness, solidarity, and sufficient use of force and firepower.
|
|
|
+9
link
|
Siankan
Posts: 1048
10/25/2017
|
Optimatum wrote:
If we can't get half the confessions until then, every confession gain will still have a 50% chance of being a first-week confession.
Now, I could be misremembering from a year ago, but as I recall, all of the confessions from Week 2 were from that set. The options flipped completely. While this does screw you over if you're not prepared for the change, it makes it a lot easier if you are.
That said, remembering my own name feels like an accomplishment at the moment, so I stand ready to be corrected.
--
Prof. Sian Kan, at your service.
|
|
|
+1
link
|
dov
Posts: 2580
10/25/2017
|
No. Last year, on week two you could draw any of the 7 possible confessions.
--
 Want a sip of Hesperidean Cider? Send me a request in-game. Here's an_ocelot's guide how.
(Most social actions are welcome. Please no requests to Loiter Suspiciously and no investigations of the Affluent Photographer)
|
|
|
+4
link
|
Anne Auclair
Posts: 2215
10/25/2017
|
I think it's worth pointing out that the new Hallowmas is a bit more intensive time and resource wise than any other Festivals, except maybe the Election. It requires almost completely new content every year: confessions, the Mayor, companions, items... The Feast of the Exceptional Rose, Sackmas, and the Festival of the Zee are much more low key, with any changes amounting to minor tweaks. So the Festival being more limited seems clearly motivated to nudge people towards fate and increasing the return on investment. And as much as I'd like everything to be free, FB needs to pay people, keep the lights on, nurture other indie developers, and develop a major game for release (all game development having a degree of risk, more so for smaller studios). So, I'm not so bothered by this...it's how the company makes a lot of its money (I paid fate for my Profoundly Educated Gentleman at the Rose Feast - couldn't get it any other way, as opposed to the Midnight Matriarch of the Menagerie of Roses, which I only need three free confessions for).
--
http://fallenlondon.storynexus.com/Profile/Anne%20Auclair
|
|
|
+1
link
|
earthbourn
Posts: 149
10/25/2017
|
Sir Frederick Tanah-Chook wrote:
Failbetter aren't idiots - they aren't going to make the game comically difficult. And when players get bitter and argumentative every time difficulty is revised upward, devs are faced with the choice of a game that can only remain static or get easier, or a community that's perpetually furious.
I'm obviously not in the same position as everyone, but to use myself as an example: My current main is only 6 months old, but I'm not a new player, so I've been able to progress pretty far in that time. I'm a mid-range POSI, and I've spent a fair bit of Fate on BDR gear. And from where I'm standing, 8 Notability for a single confession does seem comically difficult (for me). I could get there once during the event, maybe twice if I focused exclusively on that. If it's FBG's intention to have the bulk of the event well-nigh exclusive to only the highest-level players, that's their prerogative. If that's the case, I'll pick up my free confessions and get what I can of the rewards. But I would have liked something that I could participate in.
--
Tenterhook - A sun-seared creature learning to be human.
The Mechanist, L. - Found what she was looking for. Gone now.
|
|
|
+9
link
|
Anne Auclair
Posts: 2215
10/25/2017
|
It's also worth pointing out that new players by definition can't even use Notability. Like, if you're brand new you haven't played far enough to become A Person of Some Importance, which takes some time as you have to complete all the opening story-lines and the Ambitious Barristers requirements. So five Notability is just as impossible for a new Unimportant Character as eight Notability.
.
edited by Anne Auclair on 10/25/2017
--
http://fallenlondon.storynexus.com/Profile/Anne%20Auclair
|
|
|
0
link
|
Diptych
Administrator
Posts: 3493
10/25/2017
|
I was probably too terse and irritable, for which I apologise. I've edited my original comment. But, I've seen a lot of gaming communities tear themselves apart over the years - some, very recently - and was disappointed to see the behaviour displayed in this thread.
edited by Sir Frederick Tanah-Chook on 10/25/2017
--
Sir Frederick, the Libertarian Esotericist. Lord Hubris, the Bloody Baron.
Juniper Brown, the Ill-Fated Orphan. Esther Ellis-Hall, the Fashionable Fabian.
|
|
|
+5
link
|
Optimatum
Posts: 3666
10/25/2017
|
Sir Frederick Tanah-Chook wrote:
Failbetter aren't idiots - they aren't going to make the game comically difficult. And when players get bitter and argumentative every time difficulty is revised upward, devs are faced with the choice of a game that can only remain static or get easier, or a community that's perpetually furious.
Failbetter isn't going to make the game comically difficult intentionally. (Aside from SMEN of course.) However, they can certainly make the game comically difficult by accident, and I'm pretty sure that's what they've done. Notability 8 is reasonably challenging even for high-BDR endgame players such as I. Maybe FBG wants that level of difficulty, I don't know. But I think they've underestimated the difficulty of having to reach Notability 8 over and over, which requires either gaining a ninth level or being lucky with card draws.
Also, it's certainly possible to change the game without angering the community. Most new content will inevitably be easy from an endgame perspective, since it has to be playable for newer characters, and in a story-focused game like FL keeping the same difficulty doesn't detract much. It's definitely possible to make new, harder content too - the new Poet Laureate grind is pretty intensive, for instance. The issue is when an existing content framework unexpectedly skyrockets in difficulty, especially since it's paired with a time limit.
Anne Auclair wrote:
So the Festival being more limited seems clearly motivated to nudge people towards fate and increasing the return on investment. And as much as I'd like everything to be free, FB needs to pay people, keep the lights on, nurture other indie developers, and develop a major game for release (all game development having a degree of risk, more so for smaller studios). So, I'm not so bothered by this...it's how the company makes a lot of its money.
You're right, a lot of free-to-play games are designed that way. Fallen London hasn't been, at least up until now. A lot of content does have options to speed things up with Fate, whether to skip grinding items for a ship or get out of a menace zone instantly or just get more actions directly, but all of that content lets you do things the slow way. Content either explicitly requires Fate from the start or can be done entirely for free. This Hallowmas setup implies you can get everything for free, but in practice the deadline pressure means either shelling out Fate or missing the goal.
Anne Auclair wrote:
It's also worth pointing out that new players by definition can't even use Notability. Like, if you're brand new you haven't played far enough to become A Person of Some Importance, which takes some time as you have to complete all the opening story-lines and the Ambitious Barristers requirements. So five Notability is just as impossible for a new Unimportant Character as eight Notability.
Entirely true! Which is another issue I have with this design. After the free confessions, it's either Notability or Fate if you want to participate. There's no way for brand new characters to be further involved, and newer PoSIs can't realistically do much either. This change expands the definition of 'newer' but it wasn't great in the first place.
edited by Optimatum on 10/25/2017
--
Optimatum, a ruthless and merciful gentleman. No plant battles, Affluent Photographer requests, or healing offers; all other social actions welcome.
 Want a sip of Cider? Just say hi!
PM me for information enigmatic or Fated. Though the forum please, not FL itself.
|
|
|
+7
link
|
Diptych
Administrator
Posts: 3493
10/25/2017
|
Optimatum wrote:
Also, it's certainly possible to change the game without angering the community.
Not so sure about that - an artist can't control the audience's reaction to their art. Chess players were livid when the queen gained the ability to move in eight directions. Sherlock Holmes readers raged at the publication of The Final Problem - which, while not a great send-off, was still rather better than His Last Bow.
--
Sir Frederick, the Libertarian Esotericist. Lord Hubris, the Bloody Baron.
Juniper Brown, the Ill-Fated Orphan. Esther Ellis-Hall, the Fashionable Fabian.
|
|
|
0
link
|
Anne Auclair
Posts: 2215
10/25/2017
|
Optimatum wrote:
Anne Auclair wrote:
So the Festival being more limited seems clearly motivated to nudge people towards fate and increasing the return on investment. And as much as I'd like everything to be free, FB needs to pay people, keep the lights on, nurture other indie developers, and develop a major game for release (all game development having a degree of risk, more so for smaller studios). So, I'm not so bothered by this...it's how the company makes a lot of its money.
You're right, a lot of free-to-play games are designed that way. Fallen London hasn't been, at least up until now. A lot of content does have options to speed things up with Fate, whether to skip grinding items for a ship or get out of a menace zone instantly or just get more actions directly, but all of that content lets you do things the slow way. Content either explicitly requires Fate from the start or can be done entirely for free. This Hallowmas setup implies you can get everything for free, but in practice the deadline pressure means either shelling out Fate or missing the goal.
That's one way to look at it. Another way is that you can get any one or two big items or companions without paying fate, you can get multiple minor items or companions without paying fate, but after a certain amount of acquisition you probably need to either budget or pay fate. So lets say you want the Suave Henchmen before anything else? He's yours! In the Feast of the Exceptional Rose he'd be locked behind a paywall. I can see why this system would be less than pleasing for the collector, but at the same time it's a wonderful boon for the bargain shopper. If you're the type who is inclined to pick and choose, this is very nice.
.
The sneaky thing isn't so much the time limit - all festivals have time limits. It's more that everything is special limited edition content, which makes it more desirable than something you could get every year at your leisure. Though limited edition content has already been done in the Election and Zee Festivals, just not to this degree. Still, the degree is new and worth pointing out. If you're the sort to get really caught up in "limited time offers" then I'd suggest extra degree of awareness and detachment, lest you get too caught up.
Also, I wonder how sustainable a New Content Every Year Hallowmas actually is. Like, we're already approaching an oversupply of companions. My character could open another level of the Labyrinth of Tigers if she was so inclined.
.
edited by Anne Auclair on 10/25/2017
--
http://fallenlondon.storynexus.com/Profile/Anne%20Auclair
|
|
|
+3
link
|
Tay1or
Posts: 163
10/25/2017
|
Add to that, no new items at the Zee Festival, and no new art for this year's Hallowmas Companions--not at all pleased.
|
|
|
+3
link
|
Anne Auclair
Posts: 2215
10/25/2017
|
Drake Dynamo wrote:
This year they opted to change the companions, add completely new stuff and make it more difficult to obtain confessions. The combination of these three make it feel like the decks have been rigged against us, especially considering last year it was completely within the realm of possibility to get all the companions.
Well, that's because the decks have been rigged against you, quite intentionally so. But only up to a point. If you play, it's impossible to get nothing.
--
http://fallenlondon.storynexus.com/Profile/Anne%20Auclair
|
|
|
0
link
|
Optimatum
Posts: 3666
10/25/2017
|
@Anne: Posting from my phone, so this will be briefer than I like.
1. Different players have different goals. I do like that people can pick and choose if so inclined, but not everyone is, and FBG knows that well. (I really like the Election's compromise with everyone getting one free item.) I'd be okay with this direction if it were more like the FotER, where it's clear you'll need to spend Fate to get everything; making it necessary but not saying so doesn't sit right with me.
2. The issue isn't the time limit or the limited edition items. The issue is the time limit that's shorter than the amount of time the grind actually takes.
Sir Frederick Tanah-Chook wrote:
Optimatum wrote:
Also, it's certainly possible to change the game without angering the community.
Not so sure about that - an artist can't control the audience's reaction to their art. Chess players were livid when the queen gained the ability to move in eight directions. Sherlock Holmes readers raged at the publication of The Final Problem - which, while not a great send-off, was still rather better than His Last Bow.
True, there will always be vocal complaints about anything. A better way to phrase it: It's certainly possible to change the game without angering the majority of the community.
edited by Optimatum on 10/26/2017
--
Optimatum, a ruthless and merciful gentleman. No plant battles, Affluent Photographer requests, or healing offers; all other social actions welcome.
Want a sip of Cider? Just say hi!
PM me for information enigmatic or Fated. Though the forum please, not FL itself.
|
|
|
+6
link
|