>sure dying from an SG or griffin sucks, but every time you are
deliberately
>fighting something, and things go bad, or its really close, or you pulled
>too much, etc. etc. etc. and you get that excited/scared feeling in your
>stomach, and your heart starts pounding...
>think you'll ever get that with no penalties for dying? why would you? no
>dying penalties=no challenge=no fun.
Actually, yes, I would get that same feeling. Dying in and of itself is the
punishment, not to mention having to run back and loot your corpse (which
still sounds a bit bizarre when trying to explain the game to someone)
>Some folks just don't like dying - that in and of itself is enough of a
>penalty, thank you very much.
My point exactly. Ye olde "LOADING... PLEASE WAIT" sign is more than
discouraging enough for me. That coupled with the run back to my corpse is
enough to keep me wary.
>sorry i don't see the connection. i advocate not letting melee/hybrid
>classes to be able to bind, making the game harder. how does that make it
>easier to "win" or have anything to do with what you said?
I'm still trying to make the connection of "harder game = more fun". If
that's the theory, then you must love PoF. While we're at it, let's go
ahead and raise MOB levels and lower PC levels by 50% across the board. Oh,
and don't forget to lessen the amount of experience you get for killing
something by 50% too. Heck, if a harder game is more fun, then let's get
rid of Bind Affinity altogether. Yep, folks will be beating down the doors
to get EQ then.
>no one likes dying, not just some folks. that's the point, it is bad to
>die. if there were no consequences, there would be no challenge. is this
>what you are referring to, my point of the game being a challenge? this
has
>nothing to do with wanting to win, it has only to do with wanting to have
>fun, and not being bored. it is after all a game, and if you are not
having
>fun, you shouldn't be playing.
Have you ever played a MMORPG that didn't have such consequences?
Probably not as there are not many (if any) out there. If you had, you
would realize that dying still sucked, but not only did it NOT take away
from the challenge of the game, but it actually ADDED to the fun. (yeah,
yeah... I know. This is like trying to understand Chinese Algebra.)
Actually, I don't think it would work in EQ. NWN was a MUCH different
game, with a different all-around setup. I DO think it could work in some
other MMORPG, though.
Also, if you want to toss lack of Binding in as a race balancing issue, then
all classes should be able to bind, or not. That would be balanced How is
it balanced for a mage to be able to bind anywhere in any zone and melee'rs
not? If anything, the opposite would be true. A lot of mage classes can
teleport (some can also SoW) and therefore cover vast distances much more
quickly than the poor lumbering melee'r who is forced to run (and slowly at
that) from Point A to Point B. Also, all casters need to do to be viable
for combat (for the most part) is re-mem their spells, and they are good to
go. Try being a tank with no weapons or armor. Where's the balance there?
-=B=-