test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
How to fortify the Foundry from exploiters.
aandrethegiant
Member Posts: 3,366 Arc User
The Foundry in Neverwinter is one of the most exciting things being made in the genre today. If you don't know what it is, here's the quick run-down: it's a toolset for user-generated content. Yes, just like the old days, you will be able to manufacture your own quests, scenarios and designs for public consumption. Unlike the old days, however, The Foundry is built for the plug-and-play generation. No additional installations required.
But that doesn't mean people wont try to break it, and/or try to "load the dice"..
Let's get one thing straight. I do not like cheaters/exploiters. Anyone who gets self gratification out of cheating the system or cheating others is an embarrassment. Many do it for profit, whether it be reputation or money, or both. Cryptic NEEDS to come down hard on exploiters from day one. Don't slap them on the wrist. If they are caught, get them out of the game permanently. DDO failed miserably at this. Self described "lifetime bans" lifted because they called up the office and "cried." Please.
So consider this thread a think-tank to help devs code the Foundry to lock out cheaters.
The first thing Cryptic needs to do is word their EULA carefully. Use a fine tip, and write in black ink. No grey areas. If you are caught, depending on the severity you are gone. Whatever the details are, make it clear.
The second thing they need to do is enforce it.
Now... let's discuss different ways the Foundry may allow exploitation. There is no harm in discussing this because the bad guys will find out methods soon enough. I prefer to discuss this now, to ensure Cryptic has thought of as many ways as possible cheating can be done, and defeated, before it launches.
I'm planning to list them here, problem first, then solutions.
1. Loot value per chest - Fix: The author doesn't get to place treasure, or change mob drop rates, or even change basic mob statistics.
2. Quickie "Monty Haul" Quests for near instant loot or in-game money - Fix: Flag as exploit, let it go to second review group. If they both agree via majority, a Cryptic rep makes final decision.
3. Copyright infringement - Fix: Not an exploit, yet no tool in STO foundry to protect itself from infringement. May need a solution in Neverwinter since thousands will be coming from DDO who wish to create DDO like missions that are actually ... better! If Turbine sees dozens of DDO quests on the board I'll bet my last dollar Turbine is going to be pissed off! And pissed off means their lawyers get to role play
4. "Hiding" the quest entrance by not listing quest giver or entrance location in the instructions - Fix: All authors should be required to list location of the quest entrance. As a matter of fact, it should be coded so that if they don't choose the proper coordinates, they cant submit the quest in the first place. In any case, reviewers need the authority to send quest back to author to fix, remove quest entirely or send quest to Cryptic employee for edit/removal.
5. Volunteer reviewers on the take - Fix: Better selection process (in-game community voting and review of authors, with an ability to report known exploiters to Cryptic reps) and penalties for exploit happy reviewers.
...
Best method thusfar to improve upon the Foundry's 5 member panel:
One of several community selected groups of five member panels review quests. If quest is deemed an exploit, by majority, then it's sent to a 2nd tier five member panel (also community selected members) for review. If 2nd five member panel agrees by majority, quest is automatically sent to Cryptic employee for review. Once quest goes live, if the community deems the quest is an exploit (by lets say greater than a 25% margin), the quest must be reviewed again to test the exploit reported. It would follow the same process as it did originally, albeit with the new knowledge as granted by the community.
But that doesn't mean people wont try to break it, and/or try to "load the dice"..
Let's get one thing straight. I do not like cheaters/exploiters. Anyone who gets self gratification out of cheating the system or cheating others is an embarrassment. Many do it for profit, whether it be reputation or money, or both. Cryptic NEEDS to come down hard on exploiters from day one. Don't slap them on the wrist. If they are caught, get them out of the game permanently. DDO failed miserably at this. Self described "lifetime bans" lifted because they called up the office and "cried." Please.
So consider this thread a think-tank to help devs code the Foundry to lock out cheaters.
The first thing Cryptic needs to do is word their EULA carefully. Use a fine tip, and write in black ink. No grey areas. If you are caught, depending on the severity you are gone. Whatever the details are, make it clear.
The second thing they need to do is enforce it.
Now... let's discuss different ways the Foundry may allow exploitation. There is no harm in discussing this because the bad guys will find out methods soon enough. I prefer to discuss this now, to ensure Cryptic has thought of as many ways as possible cheating can be done, and defeated, before it launches.
I'm planning to list them here, problem first, then solutions.
1. Loot value per chest - Fix: The author doesn't get to place treasure, or change mob drop rates, or even change basic mob statistics.
2. Quickie "Monty Haul" Quests for near instant loot or in-game money - Fix: Flag as exploit, let it go to second review group. If they both agree via majority, a Cryptic rep makes final decision.
3. Copyright infringement - Fix: Not an exploit, yet no tool in STO foundry to protect itself from infringement. May need a solution in Neverwinter since thousands will be coming from DDO who wish to create DDO like missions that are actually ... better! If Turbine sees dozens of DDO quests on the board I'll bet my last dollar Turbine is going to be pissed off! And pissed off means their lawyers get to role play
4. "Hiding" the quest entrance by not listing quest giver or entrance location in the instructions - Fix: All authors should be required to list location of the quest entrance. As a matter of fact, it should be coded so that if they don't choose the proper coordinates, they cant submit the quest in the first place. In any case, reviewers need the authority to send quest back to author to fix, remove quest entirely or send quest to Cryptic employee for edit/removal.
5. Volunteer reviewers on the take - Fix: Better selection process (in-game community voting and review of authors, with an ability to report known exploiters to Cryptic reps) and penalties for exploit happy reviewers.
...
Best method thusfar to improve upon the Foundry's 5 member panel:
One of several community selected groups of five member panels review quests. If quest is deemed an exploit, by majority, then it's sent to a 2nd tier five member panel (also community selected members) for review. If 2nd five member panel agrees by majority, quest is automatically sent to Cryptic employee for review. Once quest goes live, if the community deems the quest is an exploit (by lets say greater than a 25% margin), the quest must be reviewed again to test the exploit reported. It would follow the same process as it did originally, albeit with the new knowledge as granted by the community.
TYRS PALADIUM - A Premier Neverwinter Online Guild
No Drama. Camaraderie. TEAM Focus. That's the TYRS way. If that's your style, come join us!
Research our Guild here: Read our official Recruitment thread | Sign up here: Tyrs Guild Website! | NEVERWINTER GUILD LEADERS: Join the Fellowship!
Post edited by aandrethegiant on
0
Comments
The main exploit that exists within STO's foundry is the daily. For those who are not familiar with STO, there is a daily mission(created by the Devs) that requires you to play 3 foundry missions for a reward. Foundry authors have exploited this daily by creating "quickie' missions that only involve clicking a button, meaning you can literally complete the mission in 1 second.
It is unknown whether NW will have such a daily mission requiring people to complete X number of foundry missions for a reward, but considering the fact that dailies are a staple of almost every MMO, I would consider it likely.
My proposed solution is to scale mission rewards on the average time required to complete the mission. Why average? Because this means there is nothing you personally can do to game the system. You cant just waste time and go AFK and get a bigger reward. But if a mission takes 1 hour to play on average, it will give a better reward than a mission that takes 5 mins to complete on average. Initial averages can be based on the first 5 people to review it, then then an auto adjust as more people play it once its live.
The STO team seems to have made an effort to prevent this mistake by establishing player reviewers. However, when signing up to be a reviewer it says that you're only to report content that is "inappropriate", which I take to mean in violation of the ESRB's 'Teen' Rating, and for violations of the Foundry EULA.
There is another type of content that I believe that Reviewers should be able to report as well: Storyless Exploit Missions.
PROBLEM: However how do we craft a definition for what is considered an Exploit? Is killing one monster or 5 monsters or 20 monsters an exploit? Where do we draw the line? One thing is certain. Everyone will never agree on one definition.
Cryptic MUST discuss exploits, and what is going to be allowed and disallowed.
Here's my current thoughts on how to stop the exploiters dead in their tracks, as well as make it easier for gamers to find quests they DO wish to run faster than in STO:
If someone's idea of fun is to play a boring map grinding through the same mobs over and over..well who am I to tell them how to best spend their time?
A solution could be to let reviewers add a category tag to their review like
farm/grind
story heavy/RPG
combat heavy
series
short/medium/long
exploit
etc.
- Once a mission gets flagged enough it gets put into that category.
- You can pick (check off) which of those types you want to see when you go looking for Foundry quests.
If a quest gets flagged as an exploit enough times, it gets put up for review again, possibly to be reviewed by a separate 5 reviewers. If they agree that the quest is not designed the way the game is "supposed to be played, it gets looked at by a Cryptic employee, who gets final say if a quest stays or goes.
TYRS PALADIUM - A Premier Neverwinter Online Guild
No Drama. Camaraderie. TEAM Focus. That's the TYRS way. If that's your style, come join us!
Research our Guild here: Read our official Recruitment thread | Sign up here: Tyrs Guild Website! | NEVERWINTER GUILD LEADERS: Join the Fellowship!
Since the treasure drop is based on this at the end of a module as reported for NW's foundry, I think is makes a lot of common sense. Here's to Cryptic enforcing common sense.
A good idea for a "minimum qualifying" approved mission is completing a minimum number of gateways in a mod. That doesn't mean killing x creatures is only accepted for a "gateway" as if could be a take from a to b or solving a riddle, but by having a minimum number done (say three for example,) it makes the mod a minimum of some accomplishment. This method would mean such "encounters" could be combat, puzzle solving, role playing, exploration, etc.
Or, secondly, if we're not doing the above so you could mix action and RP and puzzle solving, you'll have to have a minimum xp amount given from a mod per the difficulty rewarded from the module per its difficulty created to qualify. So a qualifying mod would need at least 600 xp and a 30 second or less granting 50 xp would not count as one of the three.
As far as I know, Warner Bros. is also working with Cryptic on NWO as they have a hand in D&D/WotC and they've been in some NWO video interviews with Cryptic, just like WotC has been. Here is one example. See the guy seated on the right? He's from WB Games. The guy standing to the far right is from WotC. I'm bad with names.
As for copyright material, as long as it is not against Cryptic/PWE's contract with WotC and WB, then it should be okay, especially if it is Forgotten Realms based or D&D based for that matter. This is where player common sense comes into play, some will violate laws regardless, others know better than to "create" something beyond the IP at hand.
Ultimately, such things will have to be ruled upon solely by the companies in question and we probably won't ever know such outcomes beyond player heresy and observances, for as a general rule, companies do not discuss legal matters with those not involved in the situation at hand.
[ Support Center • Rules & Policies and Guidelines • ARC ToS • Guild Recruitment Guidelines | FR DM Since 1993 ]
STO to encourage people to play Foundry missions bribe them to play at least 3 a day giving them dilithium (game money) as a reward. Some Foundry authors exploit it by making 'quickies' such as "Water the Bush" part 1, 2, and 3. They all have 1 simple objective and are done before they start. If Cryptic follows format (which they will) you will end up with these slop missions clogging the arteries of the Foundry.
If you keep up on the information, you cannot offer rewards in your missions as the Foundry picks them at random for the player level. But if Cryptic offers rewards just for playing 3 missions a day, expect many exploits such as "Touch My Troll".
STO Foundry Forum can be accessed here.
Just killing time...
Actually that is the only place where they shared the stage and you can see the rivalry between DDO and NW. Yes they present to you as they are toghether on this but the truth is each of them are trying to push their own agenda in a friendly way. e.g. if you look at part 1, the DDO guys comment about how NW planned entry during UGC. DDO talks about character creation as being very D&D knowing NW doesn't allow multiclassing etc.
So even when WotC brought both of them together (as the convention was about D&D going digital and these two are the main MMOs) they are still rivals and not collaborating a lot.
They can perhaps gain a lot if they collaborate, but the most hopeful of scenario would be that they are ready to agree on agendas which benefit both of them while maintaining friendly rivalry.
Also NW CEO actually stole the show because of his high Charisma, even though DDO guys seem to have high INT.
The dungeon have certain perameters.
The loot from the chest (which i think is one per dungeon or maybe boss type mob?) I believe is based on time taken to complete said dungeon, so quickie dungeon will have a very small reward chest. I do not believe you can affect what the chest drops, it will just drop what a normal chest will drop for equivalent dungeon.
The level of dungeon is based on your level/group level.
The creatures again drop as they would normally, based on your/group level, the drops for them can not be changed.
In STO you can also remark on the quest so say it is story based, grind whatever.
What i would like to see, is maybe a variance in hardness..so can complete on "normal" say then try a "hard" mode, though again they have that in STO so would assume similar in NW.
Awesome. Copyright infringement.
In your case, unless they receive a cease and desist order from WB/Turbine, I dont think Cryptic will care. If they do however, Cryptic will most likely order the quest name changed, or take down the quest.
People will definitely test this theory, and I can see Turbine as being all over this one, to protect their property.
TYRS PALADIUM - A Premier Neverwinter Online Guild
No Drama. Camaraderie. TEAM Focus. That's the TYRS way. If that's your style, come join us!
Research our Guild here: Read our official Recruitment thread | Sign up here: Tyrs Guild Website! | NEVERWINTER GUILD LEADERS: Join the Fellowship!
This 2 part video by Cryptic Devs might answer your questions or just pose more.
In part 2 she does state that the chest is rigged to deliver based on player level.
Just killing time...
So the STO Foundry EULA states that STO gamers cannot recreate the likeness of actors.
However in a Q&A session, a STO dev responded to a question about characters in makeup, affirming that the use of characters in full makeup from the shows does not violate the Foundry's EULA.
The clarification seemed to confuse many.
In the case of real life attorney wranglings, the big case in the field is Wendt v. Host International Inc. for those curious.
Here's the deal: There are two forces at play. Copyright, which includes characters, likenesses, and mannerisms, versus Publicity Rights, which include an actor or personality's mannerisms. Copyright is federal. Publicity Rights is a state issue. Copyright preempts Publicity Rights except when Publicity Rights are focusing on a separate issue.
CBS is licensing its copyright to authors. It cannot license what copyright does not cover. Therefore, the question is what copyright covers.
I am going to break the issue down, point by point, in what amounts to rising criteria:
1. Is the character a real person? Ie. does it possess, it its entirety, the name attitude or traits associated with the performer, such that there could be no distinction made? If so, STOP. If not, proceed to point 2.
In the case of a real person, CBS has no copyright and therefore cannot transfer one to authors. If it is a real person not playing a character (ie. Shatner hosting a TV special) then CBS cannot transfer the rights. Hence the reason why real people are stated as not being usable in the Foundry.
2. Does the character contain elements developed specifically for the Star Trek properties as defined in the EULA, such as clothing, makeup, favorite foods, personality traits which may be distinct from the actor? If the character possesses none of these, STOP. If so, proceed to point 3.
CBS' claim to copyright depends upon the idea that the character possesses original traits, distinct from the actor. There is some debate over whether characters can be copyrighted apart from the films, books, television shows, and other media they appear in although consensus leans in this direction. In any case, there must be defining elements which CBS owns (such as involvement in storylines or unique traits) in order for CBS to have anything to share.
An example of this would be the playwright Samuel Beckett, who is mentioned by Sisko. I pick him because he is a modern enough figure to still be covered by his own copyrighted works and publicity claims. The version who is mentioned in Star Trek might be fictionalized; after all, he lived in a version of Earth that had been visited by Starfleet, Ferengi, and even an El Aurian. HOWEVER, the mention of Beckett on DS9 in no way sets him apart from the historical figure. So you cannot claim that this is a DIFFERENT Samuel Beckett.
However, while Jean-Luc Picard may resemble Patrick Stewart, Patrick Stewart is not a starship Captain. He does not own rights to or wear the uniform. He is not French. He does not have an artificial heart. Note, I'm not saying you can use him. I am saying he's not ruled out YET as of point 2.
3. Does the character likeness resemble the actor in a way that would cause confusion as to whether the character IS the actor? If it is a reproduction of the actor's natural face, STOP. If it is not, CONTINUE to 4.
At this point, we've eliminated Picard as he generally appears... We have not eliminated him, say, in his disguise where he was surgically altered to appear as a Romulan. We have eliminated Riker and Troi and both Crushers but NOT Data or Geordi (with his VISOR, anyway).
4. Is your use in any way creating confusion between the character and the actor? That is to say, would the actor likely be recognized and the role not recognized by the target audience, ie. players of Star Trek Online. or are you making references to the actor's career outside of Star Trek? (Audience is relevant. See Landham v. Lewis Galoob Toys, Inc.) If so, STOP. If not, proceed to point 5.
This is largely a necessary pitstop. If the role would not be recognized by the audience, likeness is being exploited more than copyright is. Authors have access to copyright but not likeness rights. For example, use of Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson as the Pendari Champion on Voyager. Using the Pendari Champion in a wrestling match (he was a boxer on the show) or casting him as a sheriff or a Scorpion King would be an example of using a character to exploit the actor's fame.
5. Does your character resemble the actor to the extent that your interpretation of the character could not be played by another actor with approximate but not exact physical characteristics, using copyrighted costuming elements? If so, STOP. If not, proceed to point 6.
This is the big one. A man with Michael Dorn's build in Worf's makeup is not something Michael Dorn would have any claim on unless by specific contractual arrangement. Any claim Michael Dorn would have would be to something more specific than his jawline or skintone, which courts don't recognize. Someone else in the Quark makeup or Odo makeup would still resemble Quark or Odo. In fact, with Worf, his stand-in would face the camera.
However, if you recreate Data, it would take more than a casual match to Brent Spiner to pull off the illusion.
As of this point, you could, in fact, use any character in an EV suit that blocks the face or that blocks enough of the face as to create uncertainty as to who the performer would be. Likewise, you could use characters at ages or in states of mutation or deformity that would create uncertainty as to the identity of the actor.
Basically, you're good if your interpretation could be played by another actor of the same height, weight, build, and physical characteristics and there is uncertainty about many or all of the actor's specific features... or if you have intentionally deviated from the actor's specific features to the extent to render the actor non-identifiable versus someone who looks similar.
There is ONE more point, however, and this covers why there was a change in policy on Cryptic's part, leavening restrictions.
6. Is your usage confusing in a way which might imply endorsement on behalf of the actors in a product which provides Cryptic Studios or CBS with financial gain?
This is the big one and why Cryptic lightened up (and likely had their own restrictions lightened).
Free to Play.
It MAY lure people to the game but it won't make them spend money directly. As long as Cryptic or CBS make no money off it directly and it meets points 1-5, it's clear.
In a similar case relating to the TV show Cheers, while the characters didn't resemble Cliff and Norm, it invoked the essence of their performance in order to draw people into a place of business where there was an expectation of purchase and Cliff and Norm themed merchandise.
As long as Cryptic explicitly says there is no expectation of purchase to play quests, the quests designed by foundry dream weavers should have a wide berth for what they can contain.
If your Foundry quest isn't selling anything and Cryptic and CBS receive no money from people playing it, with no admission and no prohibition on loitering, points 1-5 are all that matter. Cryptic is covered legally. The EULA is satisfied. There you go.
I covered the nuance but the bottom line is this:
As long as you could imagine another actor (a broad type, build, jawline, etc.) looking like your Foundry character, you should be clear. You can portray any CHARACTER as long as it would be plausible that you "re-cast" them using an actor of the same general height, build, and jawline. If there is no doubt who the actor portraying your character would be, that's when you can't use the character.
Labeling Foundry quests after DDO quests and copying dungeons and NPCs after DDO npc's I do not believe would cover Cryptic, as there isn't any precedents set, unless they try to use the F2P argument. I really don't think it would work in this case however.
Its something Cryptic better take seriously, because if Turbine wants to flex some muscle, Cryptic may very well come out on the losing end..
TYRS PALADIUM - A Premier Neverwinter Online Guild
No Drama. Camaraderie. TEAM Focus. That's the TYRS way. If that's your style, come join us!
Research our Guild here: Read our official Recruitment thread | Sign up here: Tyrs Guild Website! | NEVERWINTER GUILD LEADERS: Join the Fellowship!
What that means is that Picard being bald was not part of the story, but a physical characteristic of the actor who played him. And because of that, you may never make a bald Picard as a character in your missions. You may use the character of Picard, but you will have to either not show him or give him a different physical appearance from the actor who played him.
It should also be noted that while something may technically be legal, and Cryptic eventually be able to win a case brought against them, it is more likely that in regards to some player made mission they would rather simply remove that mission than go to court to defend it.
I already mentioned something similar in a post somewhere on the forums. I hope they place quest categories that players can tag their content with (and reviewers can modify maybe)
If I make content it will (almost) never be mon killing only. I'm a huge puzzle person, I enjoy storylines and plot twists. I love stories in which you're responsible for your actions...
This will not be content everybody likes but it's the type of content I like. I don't want to receive low ratings because the majority of players prefer mob grinding or skipping text.
I hope, but doubt, players will be able to respect that some content is good but simply not their style and vote accordingly but in the mean time the easiest way to respect the differences in content is to have players be fairly warned before playing what type of content they will be facing.
If players want to grind mobs I have NO problem with them doing so as long as they don't disrespect quality content which is more in depth.
However I also think Cryptic should put a large amount of effort into how to reward quests as well...
These were my thoughts in another...more heated...topic. This is my thoughts on how to prevent people from wanting to make short quick reward quests even if no system is in place which rewards daily completions:
As Jack said (paraphrase): Why should I care if you want a Monty haul Campaign? In what way does it adversely effect me? Play the way you want, enjoy the game and let others do the same.
Think a mod is an exploit? Do not play it.
But all things considered, created content shouldn't be outright punished for not being quick wins, easy loot and vast xp. The system should be somewhat, behind the scenes, accounted for to prevent what seems to have become a decent issue on STO.
Also those features will NOT be in at launch. Furthermore he stated more along the lines that the items, not the character or XP would be locked into certain content although that is subject to change.
For now, and for all intensive purposes, Cryptic has stated they want UGC to be balanced. They, like us, don't care if people enjoy that content or make that content...
But they do care, as I care, if that content become mandatory in a sense because more complicated content rewards can't compare.
You're right in the citation but you didn't get the whole scope of Jack Emmert's statement.
This works in single-player games.
Neverwinter is not a single player game, thus any exploit can potentially affect everyone on the server. If a group of people manage to get an advantage in terms of leveling/gold/gear etc that was not intended to be available, then that's gonna affect someone. That ofc won't affect NW that much in terms of player balance, as the game is not gonna be focusing much into PVP, but nevertheless, in an always-online, common-for-all environment, unfair or unintended advantages should be dealt with appropriately. Exploits could potentially even render whole parts of game content obsolete, just because an inappropriately fast way to get the same rewards was found out by a modder. So, even in PVE-centric MMOs, exploits have to be dealt with, so that the game is playable as originally intended.
No, I understand that he said loot would stay. What I am saying is I do not care, nor should you nor anyone else if a quest gives 5% (example) more xp per minute than another quest for less work. If I do not play that quest it has ZERO impact upon my play time. If I DO run it, it has ZERO impact on someone elses playtime.
If Cryptic wants content removed it will be. IF they do not care - then I do not care either. It only affects me if I play a module that is supposed to be fun/good and it sucks. Then I rate it as "XP is high but this really blew chunks" or some such, mark the creator as someone not to follow and move on.
why is that so hard for everyone else? I could care less if you level faster than me, I could care less what loot you have. All I play for is to have fun, not be envious of everyone else.
The "Cheating is ok because it's self contained" mindset won't work. It did not work in DDO, and it wont work in Neverwinter. It hasnt worked in STO, and it will work less even here. Give exploiters free reign to creating Monty Haul quests turns the Foundry into a catalog of cheats and exploits, and most importantly clogs up the boards for those looking for real content. Players looking for real quests will have trouble distinguishing real content from the Monty Haul/exploit quests, and the Foundry once overburdened with these exploits will really turn the masses off.
Jack Emmert is one cool cat, but what he said there is perhaps the biggest blunder mentioned thusfar, that could typecast the NW dev team's prized creation/possession in a really negative light.
Here's a great video describing what a Monty haul campaign is and why I feel will kill the NW Foundry for many and mar Neverwinter's reputation just it tries to gain recognition. Many of the tips can actually be converted to solutions Cryptic can use to minimize/eliminate Monty Haul quests.
http://youtu.be/FkzImjTJIaw
TYRS PALADIUM - A Premier Neverwinter Online Guild
No Drama. Camaraderie. TEAM Focus. That's the TYRS way. If that's your style, come join us!
Research our Guild here: Read our official Recruitment thread | Sign up here: Tyrs Guild Website! | NEVERWINTER GUILD LEADERS: Join the Fellowship!
Actually they are working on making it self contained for *IF* they ever give any kind of XP/Loot control to the module creator. This is why as the great Bill Murray said in 'Meatballs" = "It just doesn't matter!"
If Cryptic does not want a module - it will die. IF they do not care - then I do not care. Why should I care if a guy gets 35% more XP than me in a day by doing a fast quest? In what way does that adversely impact my fun?
Well I don't abide by the ESRB. Inappropiate has different connotations for everyone. I haven't yet yead the PW EULA nor do I wish to, as most agreements can be done away with if we just simply agree to be nice to each other.
On one level however, Inappropiate could mean hastily thrown together quests, whether intended for a quick daily run or a simple prototype of a future dungeon. I do not want either of these types of quests to show up in the public quest selector.
On another level Inappropiate might mean a quest where you are ordered to dismantle/takeover a brothel by any means necessary. I personally don't think I would see that as Inappropiate. No matter the coarseness of the language used in the dialog boxes. PW should know everyone's age after all... b:shutup
This argument is silly Razor. It matters because as gamers who play the game the way it was meant to be played are enjoying content, there's a boatload of level 60 toons running around maxed out who didnt earn a thing. As more and more people exploit, there's less toons around at their level to run with. And many of the toons that are around, may be carrying loot that's far beyond the level of those who have been playing by the rules. Its unbalancing to the game. As the allowed exploits goes on longer, there will be less content to run because they'll be more and more of these cheating quests.
Those are just some of the major ways that will affect other people's gaming during the first week alone. And they will happen.
If nearly 100% of the Foundry content contains quests with real stories, real objectives and good loot, it will be vastly more exciting to the masses than 50% quests that follows the rules, and 50% Monty Haul 1 click loot scores that has no purpose in the game accept to get your hands on something you didnt earn.
TYRS PALADIUM - A Premier Neverwinter Online Guild
No Drama. Camaraderie. TEAM Focus. That's the TYRS way. If that's your style, come join us!
Research our Guild here: Read our official Recruitment thread | Sign up here: Tyrs Guild Website! | NEVERWINTER GUILD LEADERS: Join the Fellowship!
This is quite simple, while it is your choice to turn a blind eye to content corruption it is not and never should be a requirement to play any game.
It's a major problem MMO's face and often fail in dealing with.
In order for a game to be enjoyable for players it has to be properly balanced. If you can advance faster easier because you choose to, in a sense, cheat the system then it negatively impacts me.
If I anybody enjoys playing certain content they should be adequately rewarded for the content they played no matter which content it is.
No content should be rewarded in a sense which dictates other content is inadequate. Small differences are negligible as they should be but that's not the fear players have.
The fear is that rewards will promote one or two play-styles rather than give support for a wide array of content styles.
I'm cheated if I am told I have to play a certain way to advance at a decent rate. Obviously I shouldn't expect to get easy XP but by no means should I feel punished for not playing certain content styles.
And if I am forced to choose between turning a blind eye or leaving the game...it will be leaving the game every time.
Turning a blind eye to problems doesn't work in real life and it doesn't work in games.
Everyone has a voice of their own, and while you may not personally care, you cannot speak for anyone other than yourself.
TYRS PALADIUM - A Premier Neverwinter Online Guild
No Drama. Camaraderie. TEAM Focus. That's the TYRS way. If that's your style, come join us!
Research our Guild here: Read our official Recruitment thread | Sign up here: Tyrs Guild Website! | NEVERWINTER GUILD LEADERS: Join the Fellowship!
High level characters and twinked characters will happen no matter what you do. Within the first week or so there will be NW quest only capped characters. Powergamers can level like nobodies business. Twinking WILL happen. This will be done without any foundry content (ala DDO). Champions has a shared bank slot, NW will as well.
There will always be <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> content in foundry as well as jewels. Your argument is a moot one as builders will build what they like, players will play what they like and who really gives a <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> if joe leveled in a week?
They are working on tools that will be in place PRIOR to players having the ability to modify loot and/or xp. This will take care of the bulk of complaints. Those who still complain . . .
Well people complain about everything.
I'm a bit dumbfounded at the amount of...anger?...I am seeing in the threads recently. If you don't agree, say so. Don't basically twist words to make innocent statements ones of malice ;-)
Self contained content doesn't bother me...but note I DO NOT consider "bound" items self contained.
The only Monty Haul style campaigns I would be fine with are those that do keep all the XP and rewards inside that specific UGC. At the point, if we ever reach it, that players can basically host their own persistant worlds through Cryptic's servers I wouldn't care.
It's *their* choice to create and play that content after player persistent worlds are incorporated. It doesn't effect me if it is a separate game instance.
However if I am running around in top quality gear and max level on Cryptic's server I'd expect to not only have earned it but to only meet others who have earned it as well.
In DDO terms this would be akin to giving a sword in a dungeon that one hit killed anything and by the end of the dungeon gave players level 20. As long as when they left that instance they lost every bit of XP they Earned, the sword and any items they gained along the way why should I care?
In any case this is nothing we should expect any time soon in NW. The problem at hand is not having that effect *before* Cryptic implements any isolated Monty Haul capabilities.
Interesting. Your argument is basically - If they level faster/easier than me it upsets me because i did not do it too.
You will be outleveled. The server will have capped characters with zero foundry content in a week or so.
You are not Cheated if you play the way you enjoy and have fun doing it. You are not cheated if Bob leveled faster via different quests. IF you chose not to run a quest you are in NO WAY cheated if Bob does.
In ANY game you choose what to do and what not to do. What optionals do you do? What side quests? You choose to do or not do them.
I am in a guild that loves to Raid. I do not. I raid sometimes, most times I do not. I am not cheated because My DDO guild has pretty much top line gear and I do not. I enjoy my play time, i have fun, I run with friends, etc. I CHOOSE not to grind gear, and wonders of wonder - I am not cheated in any way.
For the record, I agree; I dont care if someone levels faster than me. I also dont care if someone gets some "phat loot" before I do. That isnt why I play. But for the people who do care about that, I completely understand why they would be miffed about someone exploiting the system. Furthermore, if exploiting the system is tolerated, that kind of mission is going to dominate the same way weeds do in a garden. There will be some great missions there too, but they will be cluttered by a bunch of quickie weeds.
And in no way am I saying those players are doing that, just listing an example.
All players need to be adequately rewarded for their time. This game is not being designed to be power-leveled as you argue although I can argue without a doubt DDO was.
Playing story/puzzle driven content which takes time, effort and thought to complete can't be overlooked for quick win hack and slash adventures.
In games developed by companies which actually care about game balancing you'll find that they do exactly as I requested.
If you play more hours than me I expect you to level faster.
If you raid more dungeons killing higher level creatures I expect you to get more loot.
However a quest is a quest whether short hack and slash or story/puzzle. Rewards have to line up accordingly or the entire system will flop.
Apples to oranges my friend. You're free to not agree but that is *your* personal choice to not care about other player's. It's a conscious decision on your part to decide to not balance the game.
And when you read any "how to make games for dummies" guides you'll hear "balance, balance, balance" like they were beating nails into your head.
You can choose to not care. That doesn't mean everybody should so I'll leave you at that. Respond if you like but I believe we have said all we can say at this point. You won't change my opinion and I likely won't change yours.