What happened to it?

There´s winner and loser in game or its not game at all.

Now theres things called games where you cant lose anything anymore,because you cant lose anyhing ,therefore those can not be games anymore.

There´s these things where you can only win after win and then win and then win even more.

These kind of things cannot be made for players because players play games.

Only thing you can lose is money.

If these things are not games then what are these things ?

   I am quite sure you actually meant something. I am very sure, either, I have no idea of what it was, and probably noone(not even you) will ever know...

I think, he initially had a point, but losed it somewhere in the middle.

I think he's saying (paraphrasing in green, hehe):

If you can't lose anything in a game, that should not be considered a game at all, because games are based on winning and losing by their very nature.

So in a "game" where you can't lose anything, the process of playing practically ends up being made up of winning, winning and winning again.

In such a "game", the only thing you end up losing is your money.

These so-called "games" are actually not games at all, according to the above definition... So, hazard a guess: What are they?

Possible interpretation:

Gaming is all about the thrill of winning vs losing. Yet today there are games that protect you from losing so that you won't feel bad... But in the end the joke is on you, because you're giving your money to a company that is actively keeping you from the core thrill of gaming! These things are not games, these are money traps built on nannying your expectations.

P.S.: The above by no means reflects my own feelings about gaming, it's just a possible "translation". :)

Originally posted by inBOIL  

What happened to it?

There´s winner and loser in game or its not game at all.

Now theres things called games where you cant lose anything anymore,because you cant lose anyhing ,therefore those can not be games anymore.

{mod edit}

By your definition, no video game is a game, particularly single player games.  You don't win anything when you complete the game; not once has cash come spewing out of my DVD drive when I have finished a game.  Nor have I had to insert cash when I lost.  The video game cannot win because it's not a SENTIENT BEING.  For the same reason a video game cannot LOSE.

Lastly, in terms of your topic, NOTHING has happened to LotRO.  It has had the same reward/death penalty it has always had; exception: skirmishes, which are IMO, MORE costly.

{mod edit}

Originally posted by Nikopol

I think he's saying (paraphrasing in green, hehe):

If you can't lose anything in a game, that should not be considered a game at all, because games are based on winning and losing by their very nature.

So in a "game" where you can't lose anything, the process of playing practically ends up being made up of winning, winning and winning again.

In such a "game", the only thing you end up losing is your money.

These so-called "games" are actually not games at all, according to the above definition... So, hazard a guess: What are they?

 

Possible interpretation:

Gaming is all about the thrill of winning vs losing. Yet today there are some games that protect you from losing so that you don't feel bad... But in the end the joke is on you, because you're giving your money to a company that is actively keeping you from the core thrill of gaming! These things are not games, these are money traps built on nannying your expectations.

 

P.S.: The above by no means reflects my own feeling about gaming, it's just a possible "translation". :)

I kinda understood what he meant. But when it comes to mmos you need to look at the small picture, not the big one. Its not about "winning" a mmo because its impossible. You have to look at all the micro events. You go into a dungeon. In that case, winning or losing is very present. Will you wipe or will you succeed in escorting the NPC? Will you kill the evil boss or will he kill you? Thats winning or losing in mmos. There are many battles to be fought. You can fight them over and over again until you win, but you can also play many games of chess until you finally win, so I dont really see a problem.

Originally posted by Toquio3

I kinda understood what he meant. But when it comes to mmos you need to look at the small picture, not the big one. Its not about "winning" a mmo because its impossible. You have to look at all the micro events. You go into a dungeon. In that case, winning or losing is very present. Will you wipe or will you succeed in escorting the NPC? Will you kill the evil boss or will he kill you? Thats winning or losing in mmos. There are many battles to be fought. You can fight them over and over again until you win, but you can also play many games of chess until you finally win, so I dont really see a problem.

Oh, I agree. Frankly, I think he should be talking about this stuff in terms of "risk vs reward" as is the norm, instead of "winning and losing", which would be akin to regarding MMOs as nothing more than competetive e-sports.

After all, there's a reason the "risk vs reward" terminology has become the norm, isn't there? :)

I understand the OP's argument; perhaps because I choose to do so. While not the most elegantly worded statement aimed directly at the MMO industry and the liberty it has taken with the risk/reward dynamic, the point is clear - if you cannot lose, you are not really playing a game. A little more support would be nice, but the argument is out there and obviously up for debate.

My answer to the OP is that for me, MMOs have shed the pretense of being games and are little more than a thinly veiled form of tail-chasing entertainment. Once the industry understood that nobody goes broke underestimating the intellect of the average person, the foundational concept of losing - and to the OP's argument, gaming - was removed altogether.

Take a game, remove the chance to loose, and you have the makings of a mainstream (and potentially profitable) MMO.

Originally posted by Nikopol

Originally posted by Toquio3

I kinda understood what he meant. But when it comes to mmos you need to look at the small picture, not the big one. Its not about "winning" a mmo because its impossible. You have to look at all the micro events. You go into a dungeon. In that case, winning or losing is very present. Will you wipe or will you succeed in escorting the NPC? Will you kill the evil boss or will he kill you? Thats winning or losing in mmos. There are many battles to be fought. You can fight them over and over again until you win, but you can also play many games of chess until you finally win, so I dont really see a problem.

 

Oh, I agree. Frankly, I think he should be talking about this stuff in terms of "risk vs reward" as is the norm, instead of "winning and losing", which would be akin to regarding MMOs as nothing more than competetive e-sports.

After all, there's a reason the "risk vs reward" terminology has become the norm, isn't there? :)

 

Perhaps he was referring to the negligible death penalties that seem to be the norm in most mmos these days, both in pve and pvp. That, added to the high rewards, might have something to do with it. Low risk, high reward.

But I think that, more then risk vs reward, fun is the most important factor. I love chess. Within a game, there is risk, but the only risk is of losing the game you're playing. if you lose you can just play again. I still dont see a problem with the way mmo's are being made.

Originally posted by Nikopol

Possible interpretation:

Gaming is all about the thrill of winning vs losing. Yet today there are games that protect you from losing so that you won't feel bad... But in the end the joke is on you, because you're giving your money to a company that is actively keeping you from the core thrill of gaming! These things are not games, these are money traps built on nannying your expectations.

 

P.S.: The above by no means reflects my own feelings about gaming, it's just a possible "translation". :)

Most likely the case.  Why someone would single out LotRO for such a thing(assumably) is beyond me.  It has the harshest punishments for failure of any recent PVE game I've played.

He could have joined the many million threads already open on this subject.  But then, he was probably too high to use the search engine or click on "recent posts".

Originally posted by Robsolf

 

Most likely the case.  Why someone would single out LotRO for such a thing(assumably) is beyond me.  It has the harshest punishments for failure of any recent PVE game I've played.

He could have joined the many million threads already open on this subject.  But then, he was probably too high to use the search engine or click on "recent posts".

With what are you comparing it and what's the actual death penalty in Lotro? As far as I know, it's only minor item damage. And you instantly teleport to nearest death spawn point, so it's often used as a form of travel.

Originally posted by Thillian

Originally posted by Robsolf

 

Most likely the case.  Why someone would single out LotRO for such a thing(assumably) is beyond me.  It has the harshest punishments for failure of any recent PVE game I've played.

He could have joined the many million threads already open on this subject.  But then, he was probably too high to use the search engine or click on "recent posts".

 

With what are you comparing it and what's the actual death penalty in Lotro? As far as I know, it's only minor item damage. And you instantly teleport to nearest death spawn point, so it's often used as a form of travel.

You are corrent, the death penalty in lotro is the smoothest out of every game I played so far. the item damage is way lower then wow's, for example, and I have used it as a form of travel in more than one occasion. However, having said that, lotro's elite areas, mobs and instances are way more unforgiving than anything Ive seen in wow, for instance. So, I take the good with the bad (even though I dont consider the death penalty in lotro to be "bad").

Originally posted by Lonestryder

 

Take a game, remove the chance to loose, and you have the makings of a mainstream (and potentially profitable) MMO.

That's a false premise.  For one, such a thing doesn't exist, and for another, if it did, it WOULD NOT do well.

There is no risk in ANY video game.  You don't buy your box and pay your sub based on how many times you're killed*.  It starts with the exact same amount of risk as a 1 player game(you have to restart from another area), plus the addition of other things, like item repair, weakness, and/or having to collect your body.

It's true that LotRO isn't risk focused, it's never been.  It's CHALLENGE focused.  They make their 6+ man raids difficult enough to where chances are extremely slim that you'll succeed the first few times, even with some online pointers.  With harsher penalties, few people would bother doing them, and/or they'd enter the fray playing in a manner that mitigates the loss(see DFO:  dudes in underwear).  As a developer you'd then have to make it to where failure was less likely, which would then mean you'd have to reduce the challenge.  This would then annoy us challenge focused people.

*Eve could be a loose exception, since you can indirectly pay ISK for ingame time.  So, success=ISK=free play time.

Originally posted by Thillian

Originally posted by Robsolf

 

Most likely the case.  Why someone would single out LotRO for such a thing(assumably) is beyond me.  It has the harshest punishments for failure of any recent PVE game I've played.

He could have joined the many million threads already open on this subject.  But then, he was probably too high to use the search engine or click on "recent posts".

 

With what are you comparing it and what's the actual death penalty in Lotro? As far as I know, it's only minor item damage. And you instantly teleport to nearest death spawn point, so it's often used as a form of travel.

"Minor" item damage in LotRO, particularly in the higher levels, isn't cheap, and it's based on the price of the gear.  My gear is equivalent to about level 58, and I pay from 100-150 silver every time I die, which takes about a half hour of grinding to make.  Add to that 10 minutes of dread which turns any significant challenge into a close call, and you've got plenty of reason not to die.

I don't know of anyone in LotRO that uses death to travel.  If they do, they might be unpleasantly surprised as to where they end up, as not all spawn points take you to town or to vendors.

There may be some who exploit the "misadventure" death; there's a valid point there.  Devs could probably eliminate most of that by decreasing the "map to milestone" cooldown.  It should be much less than an hour, anyway.

Point being, this probably speaks more to the difficulty to traverse certain places in LotRO than it does the insignificance of its death penaly.  Death costs pretty good money, so if somebody is willing to grind for a half hour rather than travel back to town...

Originally posted by Robsolf

Originally posted by Thillian

Originally posted by Robsolf

 

Most likely the case.  Why someone would single out LotRO for such a thing(assumably) is beyond me.  It has the harshest punishments for failure of any recent PVE game I've played.

He could have joined the many million threads already open on this subject.  But then, he was probably too high to use the search engine or click on "recent posts".

 

With what are you comparing it and what's the actual death penalty in Lotro? As far as I know, it's only minor item damage. And you instantly teleport to nearest death spawn point, so it's often used as a form of travel.

 

"Minor" item damage in LotRO, particularly in the higher levels, isn't cheap, and it's based on the price of the gear.  My gear is equivalent to about level 58, and I pay from 100-150 silver every time I die, which takes about a half hour of grinding to make.  Add to that 10 minutes of dread which turns any significant challenge into a close call, and you've got plenty of reason not to die.

I don't know of anyone in LotRO that uses death to travel.  If they do, they might be unpleasantly surprised as to where they end up, as not all spawn points take you to town or to vendors.

There may be some who exploit the "misadventure" death; there's a valid point there.  Devs could probably eliminate most of that by decreasing the "map to milestone" cooldown.  It should be much less than an hour, anyway.

Point being, this probably speaks more to the difficulty to traverse certain places in LotRO than it does the insignificance of its death penaly.  Death costs pretty good money, so if somebody is willing to grind for a half hour rather than travel back to town...

Yeah I had forgotten all about the dread penalty. It kind of reminds me of the HP cut in guild wars when you die. Amounts to the same anyway. And my lotro experience is at level 40 now, so my view on item repair costs might have been incorrect, at least as far as end game goes. And now that I think of it, there is no running back to your corpse like in wow either. You die, you have to fight your way back.

Originally posted by Robsolf

Originally posted by Thillian

Originally posted by Robsolf

 

Most likely the case.  Why someone would single out LotRO for such a thing(assumably) is beyond me.  It has the harshest punishments for failure of any recent PVE game I've played.

He could have joined the many million threads already open on this subject.  But then, he was probably too high to use the search engine or click on "recent posts".

 

With what are you comparing it and what's the actual death penalty in Lotro? As far as I know, it's only minor item damage. And you instantly teleport to nearest death spawn point, so it's often used as a form of travel.

 

"Minor" item damage in LotRO, particularly in the higher levels, isn't cheap, and it's based on the price of the gear.  My gear is equivalent to about level 58, and I pay from 100-150 silver every time I die, which takes about a half hour of grinding to make.  Add to that 10 minutes of dread which turns any significant challenge into a close call, and you've got plenty of reason not to die.

I don't know of anyone in LotRO that uses death to travel.  If they do, they might be unpleasantly surprised as to where they end up, as not all spawn points take you to town or to vendors.

There may be some who exploit the "misadventure" death; there's a valid point there.  Devs could probably eliminate most of that by decreasing the "map to milestone" cooldown.  It should be much less than an hour, anyway.

Point being, this probably speaks more to the difficulty to traverse certain places in LotRO than it does the insignificance of its death penaly.  Death costs pretty good money, so if somebody is willing to grind for a half hour rather than travel back to town...

For example, my burglar, has over 300 gold at the moment. I pay 90s for death (1000s is one gold) on repairs. (It's medium armor) My LM pays around 75s, Guardian around 120s. If that's not minor, I don't know what is. 100s out of 300.000s. In order words, by killing 10 mobs, you should get back the gold you lost. (Let's say that's 5 minutes).

I have no idea why did you say it takes you 30 minutes to make 100s. Even before MoM (15 levels below the cap that is now), it was easily possible to make 1 gold (1000s) per hour, there even were guides to make 3-4gold. Now with 15 levels increase cap, it's even easier. 100s is a question of 5 minutes.

Just in comparison. Vanguard has XP death penalty (which is quite severe between levels 51-55 - in some cases might take literally hours just to get back lost XP). It's as old as Lotro, and its purely PvE game. Additionally, you leave all non-bound items on the corpse (can't be looted by others, but you still have to recover it). That is just for the comparison.

Never mind LOTRO, or MMOs... the OP, if his point is to be understood, considers none of the Spawn Of Gygax and Arneson to be "games". That is, no RPG -- from original 1973 vintage D&D to the latest from WOTC and White World -- is a "game" by his narrow definition, since there is no way to "lose". (Even character death is mostly a minor stumbling block -- pass me the dice, let me roll up Throdgar VII to replace Throdgar VI, and we're off!)

Of course, this depends on your definition of "lose". I consider any attempt to take on a challenge which I do not then overcome to be a "loss". In most MMORPGs, this costs me a small amount of time and/or in-game money, sometimes XP (basically, time, again), but the cost isn't the issue; failure is. I don't like to fail. :)  It tends to spur me to go back and try again, and again, varying tactics, etc, until I either achieve victory or realize I don't have the resources (equipment, level, abilities, numbers) to accomplish the goal, no matter the tactics. (In which case, acquiring more resources and then trying again becomes the goal).

Solving puzzles/problem and overcoming obstacles, even inanimate or unaware ones, is a form of gameplay -- it provides the same mental effect. Can you "lose" to a crossword puzzle? Or Sudoku? By the OP's definition, no. By the actual, working definition of the word as it is used today, yes. You can reach the point where you realize you cannot solve the puzzle, due to too many false/wrong answers, and you must crumble it up, curse, and start over -- perhaps a new puzzle, perhaps the same one wiped clean. The part of the human brain that craves challenge and releases endorphins when that challenge is overcome (the basic Skinner box action/reward mechanic) doesn't know or care about "losing".

Of course, some people aren't interested in overcoming challenge for the sake of testing their skill. They are only capable of deriving pleasure from "beating" someone else, a sort of minor league sociopathy. To them, the game is not about "I win!" but about "YOU LOSE!". Such people do not do well in any kind of tabletop RPG, and only do well in MMORPGs designed to appeal to that particular demographic.

(I think it would be interesting to study which people think MMORPGs need a "loser" vs. whether their pre-MMORPG experience was with tabletop RPG games or with FPS type video games. My guess, based on intuition which may well be wrong, is that people used to the cooperative "Team of players vs. the world" style of tabletop games don't see the need for a "loser" in order for them to feel they've "won", whereas people used to "Me vs. you" style FPS games don't understand the idea of a "victory" that doesn't involve saying "Ha ha you suck!" to someone else. )

(Which isn't to say it isn't FUN to pound your opponent into dust and then dance on his corpse while singing a merry song. It's just not the only definition of "winning" possible.)

Originally posted by Thillian

Originally posted by Robsolf

Originally posted by Thillian

Originally posted by Robsolf

 

Most likely the case.  Why someone would single out LotRO for such a thing(assumably) is beyond me.  It has the harshest punishments for failure of any recent PVE game I've played.

He could have joined the many million threads already open on this subject.  But then, he was probably too high to use the search engine or click on "recent posts".

 

With what are you comparing it and what's the actual death penalty in Lotro? As far as I know, it's only minor item damage. And you instantly teleport to nearest death spawn point, so it's often used as a form of travel.

 

"Minor" item damage in LotRO, particularly in the higher levels, isn't cheap, and it's based on the price of the gear.  My gear is equivalent to about level 58, and I pay from 100-150 silver every time I die, which takes about a half hour of grinding to make.  Add to that 10 minutes of dread which turns any significant challenge into a close call, and you've got plenty of reason not to die.

I don't know of anyone in LotRO that uses death to travel.  If they do, they might be unpleasantly surprised as to where they end up, as not all spawn points take you to town or to vendors.

There may be some who exploit the "misadventure" death; there's a valid point there.  Devs could probably eliminate most of that by decreasing the "map to milestone" cooldown.  It should be much less than an hour, anyway.

Point being, this probably speaks more to the difficulty to traverse certain places in LotRO than it does the insignificance of its death penaly.  Death costs pretty good money, so if somebody is willing to grind for a half hour rather than travel back to town...

 

For example, my burglar, has over 300 gold at the moment. I pay 90s for death (1000s is one gold) on repairs. (It's medium armor) My LM pays around 75s, Guardian around 120s. If that's not minor, I don't know what is. 100s out of 300.000s. In order words, by killing 10 mobs, you should get back the gold you lost. (Let's say that's 5 minutes).

I have no idea why did you say it takes you 30 minutes to make 100s. Even before MoM (15 levels below the cap that is now), it was easily possible to make 1 gold (1000s) per hour, there even were guides to make 3-4gold. Now with 15 levels increase cap, it's even easier. 100s is a question of 5 minutes.

Just in comparison. Vanguard has XP death penalty (which is quite severe between levels 51-55 - in some cases might take literally hours just to get back lost XP). It's as old as Lotro, and its purely PvE game. Additionally, you leave all non-bound items on the corpse (can't be looted by others, but you still have to recover it). That is just for the comparison.

Then tell me your secrets, wise one.  At level 64 I can't make anywhere NEAR 1 gold per hour.  Maybe you're talking about harvesting goods, crafting, and selling at AH.  At which point you also have to consider the time it took to do all those things.  And it won't be anywhere near 5 minutes for 100 silver, or 1 gold in an hour.

PS:  Most I've ever had was 18 gold.  How you can have a burglar with 300 gold is beyond my knowlege... perhaps you snuck into Lonely Mountain?

Originally posted by Lizard_SF  

Of course, some people aren't interested in overcoming challenge for the sake of testing their skill. They are only capable of deriving pleasure from "beating" someone else, a sort of minor league sociopathy. To them, the game is not about "I win!" but about "YOU LOSE!". Such people do not do well in any kind of tabletop RPG, and only do well in MMORPGs designed to appeal to that particular demographic.

I wonder if those people, who successfully complete a word game, conciously or subconciously, think they "beat" the author...

Originally posted by Robsolf

Originally posted by Thillian

Originally posted by Robsolf

 

"Minor" item damage in LotRO, particularly in the higher levels, isn't cheap, and it's based on the price of the gear.  My gear is equivalent to about level 58, and I pay from 100-150 silver every time I die, which takes about a half hour of grinding to make.  Add to that 10 minutes of dread which turns any significant challenge into a close call, and you've got plenty of reason not to die.

I don't know of anyone in LotRO that uses death to travel.  If they do, they might be unpleasantly surprised as to where they end up, as not all spawn points take you to town or to vendors.

There may be some who exploit the "misadventure" death; there's a valid point there.  Devs could probably eliminate most of that by decreasing the "map to milestone" cooldown.  It should be much less than an hour, anyway.

Point being, this probably speaks more to the difficulty to traverse certain places in LotRO than it does the insignificance of its death penaly.  Death costs pretty good money, so if somebody is willing to grind for a half hour rather than travel back to town...

 

For example, my burglar, has over 300 gold at the moment. I pay 90s for death (1000s is one gold) on repairs. (It's medium armor) My LM pays around 75s, Guardian around 120s. If that's not minor, I don't know what is. 100s out of 300.000s. In order words, by killing 10 mobs, you should get back the gold you lost. (Let's say that's 5 minutes).

I have no idea why did you say it takes you 30 minutes to make 100s. Even before MoM (15 levels below the cap that is now), it was easily possible to make 1 gold (1000s) per hour, there even were guides to make 3-4gold. Now with 15 levels increase cap, it's even easier. 100s is a question of 5 minutes.

Just in comparison. Vanguard has XP death penalty (which is quite severe between levels 51-55 - in some cases might take literally hours just to get back lost XP). It's as old as Lotro, and its purely PvE game. Additionally, you leave all non-bound items on the corpse (can't be looted by others, but you still have to recover it). That is just for the comparison.

 

Then tell me your secrets, wise one.  At level 64 I can't make anywhere NEAR 1 gold per hour.  Maybe you're talking about harvesting goods, crafting, and selling at AH.  At which point you also have to consider the time it took to do all those things.  And it won't be anywhere near 5 minutes for 100 silver, or 1 gold in an hour.

PS:  Most I've ever had was 18 gold.  How you can have a burglar with 300 gold is beyond my knowlege... perhaps you snuck into Lonely Mountain?

I do have around 3 months played time among all my characters. One mob at average, no matter what kind, drops around 5-20s (coins+vendor trash), hence, around 10 mobs should cover up 100-150s repair cost (heavy armor gear, or very exceptional light/medium). One mob takes around 15-20 seconds + 5-10seconds running to another one. One death takes no more than 5 minutes to make back the money lost on repairs. WIth this simple calculation it means 1.2g per hour. This does not include possible rare items you might sell for more, or crafting material you can sell on AH.

Just as I explained that getting back 100s for repairs takes no more than 5 minutes, I expect you to do the same, how can it take you to get it over half and hour.

I don't think that having over 300 gold in Lotro is an achievement. Sure if you have 18 gold, it means you probably spent a lot of it on items from AH, but you probably wouldn't fall short comparing how much gold you made in total divided by the hours spent in game with anyone else.