I posted a similar thread on redit but I thought I would get input here as well.
Would people like the option to play on a server where the maximum play time was limited. These numbers are just an example, but say each day you get 3 hours of play time. Unused hours go into a pool up to say 30 hours. Also you can temporarily burn some extra hours (to finish a group or CR) which would then come out of your future allocation.
In effect this server would be advancement moderated for the pace of people who are limited in how many hours they can play a week. Note that this would not limit your ability to play on other servers etc.
The advantage I see is it opens up the game to people who don’t want to compete with players who can dedicate vastly more play time to the game. Often limited play time players are disadvantaged with the in game economy and also end game content, especially if it’s heavily contested. By limiting playtime you open up the content to more players are no single guild can dominate all the available content in the limited time. Also it’s likely those players who will put in 10+ hours a day won’t even play on this server at all, in effect keeping the player base separated.
This sounds like a bad idea to me. I wouldn't want to be in a great group, having fun, only to be told by the clock "your time is up!". Even if I could take some extra hours from the next day, it would make the problem worse for that day to the point where I could only really play some days of the week.
And why would you want to separate players that way? It's part of the game that some people will be further ahead. You can look up to them, envy them...and it should inspire you to work hard to become better and stronger yourself.
I really want a level playing field, but this idea is not helpful for that IMO.
Sarim said:This sounds like a bad idea to me. I wouldn't want to be in a great group, having fun, only to be told by the clock "your time is up!". Even if I could take some extra hours from the next day, it would make the problem worse for that day to the point where I could only really play some days of the week.
And why would you want to separate players that way? It's part of the game that some people will be further ahead. You can look up to them, envy them...and it should inspire you to work hard to become better and stronger yourself.
I really want a level playing field, but this idea is not helpful for that IMO.
If you find yourself in this position it's likely you have enough time to not need a server with limited play time. I mean if your constantly running out of time it stands to reason your playing a LOT.
I do understand the idea of having people to look up to, but you still get people who are leaders on a limited play time server, it just all happens slower. Don't look at this suggestion as a system for all servers, just as an option for people who may not have large amounts of playtime. Why does it matter if they get an environment that allows them to flourish without having to complete against people who clearly have a lot more disposable time.
I ... really don't get the point.
I mean, I get that you feel like slow windows players need to compete between themselves and not super hardcore 24/7 players, and I get it's legitimate in some sort. But how many problems would such a system create ?
You get 3 hours a day, pooling up to 30. You start the game 6 month after release, and heck you're 540 hours behind every Day 1 player. You can't catch up, that's a sure thing, but should you get 540 hours of playtime in "advance" to catch up ?
What if you're playing for discoveries and travelling ? Thoses 3 hours a day are spent visiting and taking screenshots, you don't progress so why would you be limited ?
What if you're playing in small group areas, hunting bats with no exp modifier ?
What if you're playing in extremely lucrative areas, such as dungeons with a full group of mentors to get quickly leveled ?
What does 3 hours means, since no one uses thoses 3 hours with the same efficiency or even the same goal ?
This notion only takes sense from a day 1 rush perpective, but it's so limitative and tied to a small fraction of players that will end up on a "no limit "server for obvious reasons : No rusher wants to be hindered.
Also it's weird from a sub based game to limit your playtime...
Not a good idea to actually force people to log off your game, going to result in lost player retention and sales. Even though you're suggesting it's for a particular server, that seems like a really extreme option to appeal to a small amount of the player base, specifically those that have the desire to compete to be the best but lack the time. I think the vast majority of players that have time restrictions are just going to play the game at their pace and focus on having fun, and large servers with a robust economy generally adds to that.
The better idea towards your goal might be to implement experience limits for a given day. Make it high enough so most casuals won't be effected, but low enough to limit hardcore players. That way you still get the playerbase spread out, but nobody is going to run a rotation and be max level in a week. If they want the game to take six months to reach max level, well, they could literally guarantee that happens by whatever experience gain matrix they implement.
This should allow casuals to play normally with minimal impact, but would probably force hardcore gamers to focus much more on horizontal leveling once they finish their xp quota for a given day. This was stated as a goal by the developers, the focus on horizontal leveling, so this approach would appear to be a serious consideration. The main concern would be if the game has enough horizontal content (quests, camps, factions, etc...) to keep the hardcores interested, but then again, if a hardcore player races to max level in a week, they are going to be in the same boat at that point anyway. If I was in charge of this project, I probably would implement something along these lines. The biggest issue with MMOs is people racing to max level where there is limited content, they either get burned out or frustrated and bad mouth the game, and that just leads to a negative impact on revenue generation. Guarantee it takes a minimum of six months to reach max level, that gives the team more time to fill end game content, keeps the hardcore players with a carrot in front of them to stay subscribed, and moves the focus to horizontal progression and the journey, rather than racing to end game to raid. It seems like the right strategic move to me and the only way to deal with the main problem with MMO launches, specifically racing to max level and the lack of end game content. The primary downside is that it really puts an emphasis on horizontal content to keep people entertained.
This is actually a very good idea because it draws lessons from the fact that the statistics show that most players consistently play according to a very similar pattern all the time . For instance the playing times during the week end are in average always longer than during the week , in the evening more than in the morning etc .
As there is a large proportion of players who play less than 20 hours the week and do so consistently every week , they often experience the difficulty that people they met and played with were levelling much faster so that they couldn't keep the same circle of friends during a long time . Who doesn't remember a nice guy one spent quality time with in Crushbone at lvl 7 only to see that he was 15 3 days later and disappeared beyond the horizon ?
So as I perfectly know that I can't take a gaming session for more than 3 hours (after that I get increasingly restless or bored or both) and that I never play more than approximately 20 hours a week, if a server advertized "Only for players playing less than 20 hours a week" I would join it without hesitating one second . Imagining that I would play only with people who have all the same playing times as I do would have for me a huge added value .
On top comes that the average level on such a server would increase much slower than on standard servers so that we'd enjoy the low-mid level content for a much longer time than elsewhere what is also positive . Last but not least there is a marketing advantage for the company who can offer to the players something that nobody else can offer "Your friends will not outlevel you for weeks and months and you will not need to suffer competition of players who play much more ." without any adverse economical effect because players playing 20 hours a week pay the same amount as players who play 50 hours a week .
Clearly such a server would be a dream for all of us low playing time players. Of course those who want to play consistently more per week would play on standard servers and would not bother us on "our" server . However I won't hold my breath :)
I like this idea a lot. For someone like me, who would rarely get in a full 3 hours a day, I see only benefits from joining this kind of server. It would mean that I can progress my character at a similar rate to most others on the server. Although, I think just keeping it at a set number or hours per week would be easier. Say 20 hours per week, unused hours can carry over the following week.
I don't see the point at all. But of course I never looked at a MMORPG as a race between players where we would need to level the playing field. It's player vs enviroment. Letting players out level another player just brings new players in.
Like a mixing pot.
If they did one of these I wouldent play on it, and I'm one that would probably never run out of time on it.
Interesting idea but I doubt it would get enough players to be worthwhile.
I share the view that outside of pvp we are not competing with eachother and so it doesn't hurt me if I take twice as long as someone else to finish content or get to a certain level.
I certainly wouldn't enjoy the thought that if I suddenly get some unexpected extra time to play I couldn't use it.
I actually like this idea, and I was thinking it'd be a good way to get me to do other more worthwhile things with my time while still enjoying the game.
My usual play pattern would be conducive to this kind of server, but I do get the odd three-day weekend somewhat often where I sink 12-18 hours a day in. And if I wanted to that - barring some kind of large accumulated hours alloance - I wouldn't be able to.
One thing we have to be very, very careful of IMO is having too many server types. Dividing up the population too much could be a death sentence.
On the other hand, fixed amounts of play time are a fantastic opportunity to sell extra play hours as a microtransaction to players of said server. "Crap, I just need one more hour to finish this level! *throws 1$ into pantheon wallet* :3
I am not a competitive player. I don't want to compete, so I don't compete. Because I'm not competitive, I don't care if others "do more" or do "better" (whatever that is) than me.
I can see how a limited time server might be attractive to someone who *is* competitve, but doesn't have much time these days. How many of those are there?
*shrug* there's no harm in it I suppose, since it is elective segregation.
As far as being "disadvantaged" in the economy or otherwise, it's a game design fault if someone who plays lots is handed any kind of significant advantage over someone who doesn't play much, or who joins the game 6 months or a year (or however much) after launch. If guilds can block content or control markets, something has gone wrong and a limited playtime server won't fix that, it will just mean it happens later than on other servers.
If, however, VR deems that those kind of behaviours are fine then perhaps, as has been discussed elsewhere, there does need to be servers with "non-competitive" rulesets, though I don't think this has to severly limit playtime or progression, necessarily (as has been discussed elsewhere).
It's an interesting idea. I kind of agree with disposalist though. If this is something that's needed because the difference in available play hours actually harms the experience of more time-limited players, then there's a fundamental design issue occurring.
Rather than force arbitrary restrictions on anyone, I'd prefer to identify and address those design issues instead. Play as much as you want, as often as you want, but regardless of how much or how little that is, you're not losing the opportunity to participate in content or in the economy.
I think the matchmaking thing will solve this.
If time spent in game at a certain time of day regularly is one of the things you can tick off- then you will find other players at the same time and it will not be an issue. Even if you miss a few days you wont be too far behind.
its happened to me, had a good few groups, made friends, then they shot ahead- they had more play time. So I had to make new friends and did so and found a great group that I spent years with.
Also, VR will be doing something to prevent the locking down of high end monsters- maybe including some mechanics from Vanguard where the monsters get greyed out- so even if you do play at your own pace and find others that do too, you would still be able to take down the Epic monster when you get up to the armor and ability to attempt it. That monster will not be unavailable.
Thankfully this will leave bragging rights, for guild X can be said to have killed Monster Y when they were at point 10 in progresion or levels. Here comes the *ahem* "unkempt" casuals who are attempting monster Y two years later- good for them or if they are at point 15 in progression or levels. the Uberguild may look down their noses and rightfully so but that does not take the accomplishment away from the unkempt guild. It then becomes more gamesmanship and bragging rights.
But puting a timer on it? like, for parents to control on-line game time for kids?. I dont think the game need to "parent" in this way.Parents need to parent in this way or address that issue at home.
Rather than restrict playtime, just make some servers that are labeled "Casual", for more casual players to gravitate to.
Although, IMO, if a guild/player labeles themselves as hardcore, they should join a PvP server not a PvE, otherwise, you're probably not as hardcore as you think you are, you just play alot.
dorotea said:Interesting idea but I doubt it would get enough players to be worthwhile.
Around 25 % of MMORPG players play less than 20 hours a week and around 75 % play less than 35 hours a week (data from EQ and WoW) This is a HUGE amount of players ! This is for example much more than the players who like competitive raiding and PvP added together .
Actually if the server was limited to 20 h per week , around a fourth of all servers would suit this type of players . I do not think that the principal attractivity factor would be "limited" competition . The principal attractivity factor would be much slower increase of the average server level excellent to enjoy low-mid level content for a long time, a big newbie friendliness and the quasi certitude that when you make new friends, they will not outlevel you within a few days so that you can group with them for a long time and share many common adventures . I am convinced that if VR made a survey with all registered forum users (the crushing majority doesn't post anyway) exposing the advantages and drawbacks with a server limited to 20 hours a week (f.ex 3 hours a day every day or 2 hours a day during workdays and 10 hours during the week end) then at least 20 % of the users would say that they would play on such a server .
Also the charm of the concept is that those who don't like it can play on standard unlimited servers as much as they like so that their opinion about time limited servers is irrelevant . I would really like if VR who is after originality was the first in the world who invents and implements the limited hours server concept and I would certainly be a happy customer on them .
Melamber said:I posted a similar thread on redit but I thought I would get input here as well.
Would people like the option to play on a server where the maximum play time was limited. These numbers are just an example, but say each day you get 3 hours of play time. Unused hours go into a pool up to say 30 hours. Also you can temporarily burn some extra hours (to finish a group or CR) which would then come out of your future allocation.
In effect this server would be advancement moderated for the pace of people who are limited in how many hours they can play a week. Note that this would not limit your ability to play on other servers etc.
The advantage I see is it opens up the game to people who don’t want to compete with players who can dedicate vastly more play time to the game. Often limited play time players are disadvantaged with the in game economy and also end game content, especially if it’s heavily contested. By limiting playtime you open up the content to more players are no single guild can dominate all the available content in the limited time. Also it’s likely those players who will put in 10+ hours a day won’t even play on this server at all, in effect keeping the player base separated.
While you may think this is a good idea, what happens when very few people's limited play hours coincide? Then what? Here you are, a Warrior for example, on a limited play server and you log in for the few hours you have and you find nobody around. And those you can find don't have their few hours perfectly synced with yours. You could easily find yourself with nobody to group with and thus unable to do much of anything. At least with a 'normal' server you have access to all those people who do play more hours than you.
Fulton said:Rather than restrict playtime, just make some servers that are labeled "Casual", for more casual players to gravitate to.
And who else gravitates to those servers? Hardcore guilds and players specifically because they will have a much easier time dominating content because of all the casual players. You won't see any difference in a casual server to that of a hardcore server when it comes to competing for content. Besides, your definition of casual will not be the same as someone elses so many people on the server will still play more often and take a more dedicated approach than you.
Vandraad said:
While you may think this is a good idea, what happens when very few people's limited play hours coincide? Then what? Here you are, a Warrior for example, on a limited play server and you log in for the few hours you have and you find nobody around. And those you can find don't have their few hours perfectly synced with yours. You could easily find yourself with nobody to group with and thus unable to do much of anything. At least with a 'normal' server you have access to all those people who do play more hours than you.
This is not a very relevant argument . What about :
"While you may think unlimited hours server is a good idea, what happens when very few people's levels coincide with yours ? Then what? Here you are, a Warrior for example, on an unlimited play server and you log in for the few hours you have and you find nobody to group with around. And those you can find don't have their levels synced with yours. You could easily find yourself with nobody to group with and thus unable to do much of anything. At least with a 'limited' server you have access to all those people who have similar levels as you do."
It is easy to show that if a server's total population is say 3 000 people playing each in average less than 20 hours a week then there would always be enough people in the same/similar level range to group with because the dispersion of levels would be much much lower . The key is that the total number of players on a limited player server would have to be larger than the number of players on an unlimited server . I could actually easily compute by how much so that people on limited servers have always a large choice of same level people to group with .