EC explains how the current progression system is flawed

[Windklinge]

LOL at you calling ct loot system GOOD or WELL RECIVICED than normal alex. that is a wrong statement right of the bat. because YOU got lucky with old systems doesnt mean they were GOOD or OK. they were RNG overkill afaik and BAD. i am GLAD they are gone now. it took me over 100 runs of wod to see the tank body drop ONCE. never saw it ever again after that. i prefer to run alex short raids for tokens 3-4 times and then i get my item when i use a pf group 90% the time. thats WAY better than running the same dungeon over 100 times to get ONE DAMN ITEM. that is a HUGE step in the right direction afaik.

anyone who thinks the old coil or ct loot were better is usually some of the most lucky players out there. of course to them its now worse. but for most it was worse before.

of course if you df alex normal all the time its no suprise you get your loot slower. but thats YOUR fault. and you can change it and raise your chances by using pf groups instead. not some RNG you have zero control over

[Fendred]

@Windklinge

Damn, that is one horrible streak of luck. I can only speak from personal experience, but you seem to be a rare exception rather than the norm. It doesn't make your experience any less terrible and they certainly should consider some way out for a player who doesn't get his drop, much like the token system they have for Ravana and Bismarck. But making a system that is only reasonable for a party finder group kind of defeats the accessibility they're aiming for, considering those kinds of groups tend to become harder to create further down the week.

Right now its offset by the waves of new players the game brought in, but as things settle down, people will congregate more towards the reset point because there is a greater pool of talented players to draw upon during that time. Sort of like how trying to get into a high level duty roulette is easier when the damage dealer knows when its prime time for tanks to log in.

[SecretCrowds]

Wow. I didn't know we had so many psychology majors on the forums.

[MilesSaintboroguh]

Wow. I didn't know we had so many psychology majors on the forums.

It happens anywhere. If someone talks about a court case, everyone's suddenly a lawyer. If there's a new fad diet, the lawyers changed jobs and now they're nutritionists.

[Whocareswhatmynameis]

The only thing that aggravates me is if treasure was a little more rare we wouldn't need so many caps and gates and people could play at thier own pace. They could have a kind of baseline set of gear that was easy to get to ensure no1 fell too far behind and was always geared enough to enjoy the content. A kind of catch-up system or what have you.

[Hix]

I got to about 1:30 and they started talking about WoW talent tree system. Then I checked the date of the video and saw it was 19 Aug 2015. That was enough info to tell me I didn't need to watch the rest of the video.

[Zfz]

I got to about 1:30 and they started talking about WoW talent tree system. Then I checked the date of the video and saw it was 19 Aug 2015. That was enough info to tell me I didn't need to watch the rest of the video.

When a 2015 book talks about political systems and use the Roman Empire as an example, it is still as relevant as ever. It is talking about an actual example of a talent tree, and the (even though old and no longer in use) WoW talent tree system is one that is very widely known and one that has been experienced by a lot of potential viewers of the video, hence a good candidate to use as an example.

If the video was titled "a sample of current MMORPG progression systems" then your reply is relevant. But that isn't the case.

[Hix]

When a 2015 book talks about political systems and use the Roman Empire as an example, it is still as relevant as ever. It is talking about an actual example of a talent tree, and the (even though old and no longer in use) WoW talent tree system is one that is very widely known and one that has been experienced by a lot of potential viewers of the video, hence a good candidate to use as an example.

If the video was titled "a sample of current MMORPG progression systems" then your reply is relevant. But that isn't the case.

They definitely talked about WoW talent trees as if they were a thing that still existed. If someone talked about the Roman Empire as a thing that still existed today, then the credibility would be destroyed. And if they actually do know that Talent trees were taken out, but then don't discuss why they were taken out, it'd be similar to saying the Roman Empire is superior to today's republican governments, without discussing why the Roman Empire fell (or even that it fell at all). In either case, they either literally don't know what they are talking about (ie that WoW doesn't use talent trees anymore) or they are hiding highly relevant information (that WoW has decided that talent trees as progression system in an MMO don't really provide customization in the way they are trying to argue).

If the first thing in your argument is just blatantly wrong, then I don't need to read the rest of your argument.

[Zfz]

If the first thing in your argument is just blatantly wrong, then I don't need to read the rest of your argument.

That is applicable only if the argument is a flow of logical deductions. But the topic at hand isn't.

The section where the old WoW talent trees were mentioned, used it to illustrate the case where, and I quote:

if, when you first logged in to World of Warcraft, you were immediately given access to all the abilities in the entire talent tree, you'd feel really overwhelmed. A progression system can be used to introduce elements of the game to the player one by one, allowing them time to familiarize themselves and get comfortable with one facet of the game before moving on to the next thing they need to learn. The best thing about this approach...

You should see now using the Talent 2.0 of WoW, for example, would not be appropriate to illustrate the point that you'd be overwhelmed without a progression system.

The video is not claiming that the old Talent Trees are superior. It wanted a real world example where skipping the progression (giving you everything right at the beginning) would overwhelm you, and WoW's old talent trees was the perfect example.

The WoW old talent trees was used as an example where having some form of progression was better than having none. It made no claims on whether that particular implementation of progression was superior or not.

Hence there's nothing "balantly wrong" by mentioning WoW's old talent trees.

[Stanelis]

Reaching the point of why I'm saying all this now. I am not saying SE has to come up with so much content that they wouldn't have to gate at all, that's impossible.

In the burning crusade expansion of wow the content was gated by the completion of each tier of content (eg you had to run normal dungeons to unlock the first raids, the first raids and some heroics dungeons do unlock some more raids, those raids to unlock the later raids...) and the initial content of the expansion lasted for month (if not years) without feeling as a grind, a chore or w/e. You never got bored because you always had a boss to work on (and their difficulty weren't artificially inflated like what we have currently in alexander savage, on average you killed like one or two new bosses per week).

The fact is there was so much content at the expansion release (I'm only talking about what was release for the expansion, not about what was already in the game from wow vanilla) that it kept people playing for month, and there wasn't much grind innvolved (playing FFXIV require to grind way more the content than what wow required back in the day, believe it or not).

SE has to gate heavily stuff in FFXIV due to the tiny amount of content at level 60 in the game.