Sign In

### Topic

#### comparing glitch to ninja gaiden

ninja gaiden is a classic side scrolling NES game. in it you play ninja gaiden (pronounced guy-dan) who runs, jumps, swords, and ninja stars. the goal is to reach the end of the level without dying. at the end of each level is a boss. defeating the game results in a cs where you get to kiss the girl and then a rolling of credits. also, the ending was that much better because it was one of the most difficult games anyone has ever played.
note that while there is theme to the game, the 'game' itself is manipulating a character to reach a goal. the fun comes from success rather than the manipulation itself. i will agree that there is fun to be had from the limited types of interaction with the enviroment... and there is fun to be had from 'being a friggin ninja' as well. but the true fun comes from completion of goals. in this, the line between winning and fun is grayed. it was very much a game. winning-oriented.
quite a while ago (2004), ninja gaiden was revived. in the new ninja gaiden, the gameplay was mostly the same (though 3D). BUT a huge addition to the gameplay was the addition of more interaction... in fact... the way you kill things... what weapons you use... in it, they expanded greatly on the 'imma friggin ninja' aspect of the theme. now, a player of ninja gaiden could play the game and enjoy it not solely for the completion of goals, but also too exclusively for being a ninja. in fact, hard parts of the game may seem like impediments to getting to enjoy being a badass. in fact so much of the game was centered on how you kill enemies, one could think of your avatar as an action figure. it was very much a toy. play-oriented.
how in the hell does this compare to glitch one might ask? allow me to share.
firstly, think of glitch not as the revived ninja gaiden. think of it first as the original ninja gaiden. in glitch, you are mostly going to be goal oriented. get food to get money to get more food to get a house. get x to get y. on getting y, enjoyment. food is your only potential pitfall in the platforming game of glitch. sure you can jump and there are holes, but falling off the screen doesn't result in death. think of it like a really soft ninja gaiden with no boss fight at the end and no awesome CS or credit roll when you defeat the non-existent last boss. but nevertheless, glitch in this regard is goal-oriented, though you make your own set of rules for victory. the thing is, it does worse at being a game than ninja gaiden.
now think of glitch like the new ninja gaiden sans 3D. in glitch you play an avatar who interacts with things. though, interaction is highly limited. you water things. you splank players. but the interactions have little to no excitement to them. the impact on the world is minimal. the fun aspect of using your glitch character as a toy wears off rapidly once you've 'done everything.' whereas in ninja gaiden, it's still fun to do some of the things you've already done. it's fun to see how different weapons will interact with the environment and enemies (plus you're a ninja). while that eventually too wears off in ninja gaiden, it's still much more like a toy than glitch.
what's my point. glitch, at the end of the day, doesn't do as well at being a goal-oriented game (success isn't hard to achieve nor is it rewarded very well), and it doesn't do as well at being a toy (interaction is limited and uneventful.)
now, i'm not saying ninja gaiden is a better game.
not even close.
they're far too different.
glitch also has the 'social' aspect. but... in my opinion... the games that i cared about the social aspect were games where i cared about the game first. that is, the game should be the draw... the social aspect should grow around a great game. if glitch is a better game and a better toy, the social aspect will improve ten fold as well.
this post was food for thought. let me know what you think.

Posted 10 months ago by Mr. Dawgg | Permalink

### Replies

- That seems like a pretty accurate critique, but... Glitch is still a work in progress, and we have yet to see it's full potential.
  This critique may be useful to the creators for further crafting of the game, but from what we've learned of where they're taking this thing it seems pretty clear that they are already well aware of the points you've made!
  I think we save this critique as is for later and revive it once again when the full version of Glitch is finished, then see what we all think about it.
  And yet, as mediocre as Glitch is right now compared to other games, I find the social aspect of it to be far superior than most other games. It's partly because those that do stick around and care end up being of a certain type, a kind of person that is particularly fun to be around or work with. A strong part of the initial lure of Glitch, as it was sold to me, was and still is the community that has grown here, and the attitudes that it holds. If those attitudes can continue to be rewarded and cultivated, this game will continue to be special.
  And, again, I think the creators of the game are still working in that direction.
  Posted 10 months ago by Carl Projectorinski | Permalink
- So, what you're saying is, these two games are exactly the same, except for all the ways they're completely different?
  Posted 10 months ago by The Missing Finger | Permalink
- it's called an analogy.
  Posted 10 months ago by Mr. Dawgg | Permalink
- no no no
  not everyone wants to come home after a hard day in the real world to play some intense action packed game. Some folks just want to go on a make believe purple flower trip, or they get a kick out of jumping around on Toxic moon, or maybe they engage in solitary mining as a way to take their minds off of other things. Maybe they just come in to chat with others or play and enjoy the social aspects of Glitch. I understand what you mean about the social aspect growing around the game but it doesn't have to be that way, and if the social aspect did only grow from the game then it would only appeal to people who like goal oriented games.
  The good thing about Glitch is that you can enjoy it in a lot of different ways. You can set goals when you feel like it; you can go crazy and give everything away; you can play game of crowns all day or just munch on purple flowers if that is what you fancy. Hopefully, when the game relaunches, there will also be more opportunities for creative self expression and more opportunities to craft original items. Maybe there will be more goal oriented activities as well, but I wouldn't want that to become the focus. I like having a variety of options and I like knowing that other people play the game in whatever way suits them.
  Posted 10 months ago by Treesa | Permalink
- Thank you Treesa for stating how many of us feel about this amazing game. I love the fact that there is no violence in the game and I can enter the world and just enjoy all that it has to offer and I know that the game creators have much more in store for us all.
  Posted 10 months ago by Breezy Meadow | Permalink
- all games do not have goals.
  all goals do not require games.
  the only two similarities between glitch and gai-den is the fact that they are side-scrolling.
  plus ninja wardrobe.
  Posted 10 months ago by CrashTestPilot | Permalink
- Treesa and Crashtestpilot, you both miss the other point I was trying to make. that is that glitch can be seen as a toy... without goals. And, i like this idea of it being a 'toy' as well. But Glitch doesn't do the toy aspect very well either. if you think it does, you need to expand your horizons or... maybe you're just really easily amused.
  All games do have goals as well. The goal is to win. If it doesn't have a goal, it's not a game. It's a toy (or an activity).
  (All goals do not require games? I don't even know how that relates to my point.)
  Posted 10 months ago by Mr. Dawgg | Permalink
- "All games do have to have goals as well. The goal is to win."
  I guess it all depends on one's pov. I do not play Glitch to "win" anything. I set goals for myself and the fact that I can do that and do not feel I need to compete with someone else appeals to me and is part of why I play Glitch. If it's a toy.. that is not a problem for me. Apparently I am easily amused and I am ok with that.
  "But Glitch doesn't do the toy aspect very well either." Is merely one opinion.
  Posted 10 months ago by Joni Mitchell | Permalink
- The fact that people are willing to season and hatch thousands of chicken eggs in order to get a badge says a lot about glitch (and about gaming) both positive and negative. The positive is that people enjoy glitch enough to actually do such a thing. The negative is that a badge like that is all that many people have left to motivate themselves to play the game. People who say that glitch can be a game without goals and accomplishments are in a small minority compared to people who want and need such things in a game.
  Posted 10 months ago by WalruZ | Permalink
- My goal when I log in to Glitch for the day is not to click arbitrary things for a small change of an arbitrary but ultimately meaningless reward. It never has been. If I liked clicking so much, I'd just play Cow Clicker. I don't log into Glitch for clicking-- but sometimes I do click on things. Nor do I log in to play glitch because I want to see the next cut scene. So-- I think I broke your analogy.
  The thing about Glitch that works for me is its immerseive persistent and evolving participatory culture. That's not a "toy" nor a "game." It's not about winning, it's not about acquiring artificial widgets and geegaws. It's about DoingStuff (x). With other people who are DoingStuff(x). Who are using the same paradigm as I am.
  The Glitch experience is about as multi-layered, open ended, and grief and drama free as I've ever come across. I have not enjoyed a community such as Glitches since Puzzle Pirates.
  I'm glad you enjoy clicking and watching cut scenes. I'm glad Glitch works for you on that level. That's evidence of it's mastery. Is it a game? Is it a Toy? Is it an MMORPG? Is it the Legend of Zelda online? Yes. No. Kind of.
  It's about all of that stuff. It's not about that stuff.
  It's about DoingStuff(x).
  Posted 10 months ago by HeyGabe | Permalink
- But Mr. Dawwgg, I *am* easily amused.
  Which is why your suggesting I expand my horizons amuses me.
  Posted 10 months ago by CrashTestPilot | Permalink
- It does the "toy" aspect ok, but they are apparently working on improving that for the relaunch.
  There are plenty of opportunities for people to set goals (except during this "beta" "waiting for the relaunch" period when we don't know what to plan/save for). They could improve the competitive games like Game of Crowns so that it would be more accessible (but I doubt I'd play it even then) for folks who want that sort of play. I still don't think the whole game itself needs more focus, I agree with HeyGabe about the multilayered, open ended aspect being a good thing. Personally, I wouldn't mind some grief and drama on the side so long as it doesn't dominate too much. If I have any issues with the culture here its that people might take things a bit too personally and try too hard to enforce niceness.
  I do understand that the goal oriented competitive folks might be feeling a bit frustrated and bored with the game while we are waiting for the relaunch. In the meantime you can always play Game of Crowns or race games.
  Posted 10 months ago by Treesa | Permalink
- This isn't a game. It's a self contained virtual world. People play games within said virtual world.
  It transcends anything that was ever available on an ancient Nintendo console in that regard.
  Posted 10 months ago by Polo Reede | Permalink
- I don't understand the meaning of using doing things as a function. As it is a function of any game. Doing things. Why are you doing things? Do you do the things in order to complete a goal to win? Do you do things just for the cause-effect interaction? You claim you do things for the participatory culture.
  Let's break that down.
  If you participate in the culture... that's going to result in a cause-effect interaction that's part of it being a toy? Why? You don't do it 'to win.' You did it to see how the community/friend/person you don't know would react. Or you clever devil! You just left something at someone's door and you left with delusions that you improved someone's day. That's still the 'toy' aspect. And it's still under developed.
  The comparison is that both games try to be toys and games. Glitch:Ninja Gaiden as Rub Chicken:Kill Enemy. Assuming your goal is to get hay. Glitch:Ninja Gaiden as Level 60:Last Boss. Assuming your crowning achievement is level 60. You can't break that analogy. It's tricky because you define your own goals and those goals are almost always easy to achieve and require no skill and result with little fanfare or reward.
  Posted 10 months ago by Mr. Dawgg | Permalink
- My personal goal has been managing my finances against giant donation and badge achievement.
  The result is resource-hoarding (so I can make higher ticket items), and not have to eat so much of my currant-generating power.
  Between gardening, mining, donating, wandering around, or occasional "okay, I have enough crap on my floor to bang out enough <itemID>s to get <BadgeID>," I find I have more than enough to keep me occupied.
  And don't get me started on all the parties I get invited to, the friends I try to help out, and the new quests I get owing to my escalating skillset.
  What I like about Ur is that, on any given day, I can focus on one particular thing, or just NOT focus on any one thing, and enjoy the experience.
  So, you're correct, Mr. Dawgg; there is no intrinsic goal inherent in Ur. But I feel it is a bit too facile to say "those goals are almost always easy to achieve and require no skill and result with little fanfare or reward." Making a million currants is certainly a slog if you're doing it without auction sniping and auto-sell, because you don't have a machine doing the heavy lifting of mass arbitrage working on your behalf. But it is a slog I've enjoyed, because there's other things -- ooh, just found a ghost!, or random achievement! -- to keep me amused.
  Which as we've stipulated is easy to do with me.
  Posted 10 months ago by CrashTestPilot | Permalink
- " Its tricky because you define your own goals and those goals are almost always easy to achieve and require no skill and result with little fanfare or reward."
  So?
  What kind of fanfare or rewards were you hoping for?
  Posted 10 months ago by Treesa | Permalink
- Fireworks. They're right there in the ideas forum too.
  Posted 10 months ago by Liza Throttlebottom | Permalink
- It's called 'end game.'
  If I grind for hours in an mmorpg it's so I have some benefit for end game or to enter end game at all. Or, shit, to be 'pimped out.' How many people spend hours questing just to get a cool hat?
  Posted 10 months ago by Mr. Dawgg | Permalink
- The OP seems to me to be trying to force Glitch into fitting into the template of the typical MMORPG.
  Some of us don't play MMORPGs, don't have any interest in playing MMORPGs, and if that's all that Glitch was, we wouldn't be here.
  Now, it's fine for seasoned 'game players' to be here as well. This is a big world, and there's plenty of room for everybody and every form of play.
  But please, don't try to force a shoe on the Glitch 'foot' that doesn't fit.
  End game, schmend game. That ain't it, that's irrelevant to some of us. If you want the game to end, figure out an ending and leave it at that.
  Glitch isn't a game. Glitch is a framework within which people can invent and play games if they so choose. The quests are really new-skill-training exercises (that's why we get them after learning a new skill,) and caring about the 'badges' is optional. I, for one, have never, ever, gone to the Leaderboard page. I don't care. You can care about the badges and 'quests' if you wish, but I don't have to care whether you do or not. And you don't have to care that I don't care. In fact, I hope my not giving two hoots how many 'badges' you have doesn't bother you.
  Posted 10 months ago by Polo Reede | Permalink
- Polo, I'm all for a different type of game (and end game). I don't want a typical mmorpg experience either. But, there's nothing there. I'm not complaining about what's offered. I'm saying that it's just not there.
  I also don't want to come off as ungrateful or even that I don't like Glitch. Couldn't be further from the truth. I'm just as much a fan of the game as anyone else. I consider myself a cynical optimist. I want to quantify, establish, measure the problems with the game (as I see them at the very least) so that we can fix them. And i'm optimistic that we will.
  Posted 10 months ago by Mr. Dawgg | Permalink
- Parrow Gnolle.
  Posted 10 months ago by Rook | Permalink
- Mr. Dawgg,
  You seem to be in search of external gratification.
  This is something that, indeed, Glitch has little.
  It's the magic sauce for which you're looking, that Glitch has in spades; it is a sauce that you can only give yourself.
  Internal Gratification. Allow yourself to enjoy the game because you do.
  Posted 10 months ago by HeyGabe | Permalink
- keep telling yourself that
  Posted 10 months ago by Mr. Dawgg | Permalink
- Urmom.
  Posted 10 months ago by HeyGabe | Permalink
- I can understand someone saying a sandbox game is more a toy than a game. Makes sense enough.
  But I'm not sure what you're looking for. A sandbox should never have anything that can be referred to as endgame. Sandboxes should have horizontal rather than vertical progression. Meaning I should be able to expand the number of things I can accomplish or participate in over time, but that a new player after about a month should be able to do any one or two of those things with the same or at least nearly the same effect or success rate as me. There shouldn't be any activity that sets you up to do something completely different after "leveling."
  It seems to me as if you are using the molds of games you are familiar with and applying them here even as you acknowledge that these molds don't apply.
  I find it much more productive to compare this game to Eve (which is a bit amusing, given how competitive and cutthroat Eve is and Glitch is not), another MMO with nothing that counts as endgame and that does not supply gratification or goals for you.
  Posted 10 months ago by Red Sauce | Permalink
- I've been doing nothing for 2 years
  hmmm
  Posted 10 months ago by shhexy corin | Permalink
- This post nails it. I was a big NES fan, and Ninja Gaiden was one of my favorite games. I think the big py-out for that game was the cut-scenes (that happened to advance the story). As much as I adore this game, (and really, I do LOVE this game) at times it feels like that 70's board game, the UNgame...
  Posted 10 months ago by JNNX | Permalink
- What the heck is ninja gaiden??
  Posted 10 months ago by daniel5457 | Permalink
- a garden full of ninjas with eyes
  Posted 10 months ago by shhexy corin | Permalink
- When potatoes have eyes, they are close to rotting in the potato bin. But you can still plant them.
  Posted 10 months ago by Polo Reede | Permalink
- Glass Bead Game (Das Glasperlenspiel).
  Posted 10 months ago by Splendora | Permalink
- Maple story is the only game remotely comparable to Glitch, and it hasn't really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like. Glitch is best.
  Posted 10 months ago by Electric Wizard | Permalink
- This game is never going to give you a prefab story. It seems they will expand the lore of the world to teach us more about the world we play in, but the only stories it will tell will be our stories, which is exactly why I'm here.
  I'm much more interested in experiences with my friends that I play with than in experiences some developer created as no matter how much choice they build into such stories, it's still their story and not mine.
  My friends grant me gratifications and feelings of accomplishment that no cut scene or quest text could ever recreate.
  Posted 10 months ago by Red Sauce | Permalink
- Actually Glitch is just like Ninja Gaiden... those damn birds!
  But really, from the moment I started Glitch I was suspicious that there was something different going on in it than in other games I've played. If you abstract away everything except "having goals" or "being a toy" then my job is a game and my daughter is a toy.
  People have lots of fun making up their own things to do, and never forget that for any online game the bulk of the players are going to be people who only play a few hours a week - especially in a game like Glitch that is so attractive to a non-traditional-gamer set. If you only play a few hours a week it will take a very long time to explore the world, do quests, level up, etc.
  I think many of us who play lots of hour are getting a little bit antsy waiting for the big update. If nothing else, that would probably be a big difference between Glitch and Ninja Gaiden. The only reason you are criticizing Glitch is because you expect it to never run out of things for you to do. You expect Ninja Gaiden to run out of things for you to do, even if you like playing it over and over.
  Posted 10 months ago by Humbabella | Permalink
- if glitch had a windy level as hard as NG2.... ugh... i'm getting frustrated just thinking about it.
  Posted 10 months ago by Sun Exploder | Permalink
- Sauceleh,
  I would completely disagree that Eve lacks end game content. Just because it isn't labeled 30 man raid doesn't mean it's not end game. End game content would be any content that requires having played the game for a long time. It's the game that persists after you've 'done everything' and still want to play. Even non-mmorpgs have an end game.
  After you beat sephiroth in FF7, the end game was killing the giant robots. In fact, I think every FF game has an end game of some form or another. Not all games have an end game though either. Ninja Gaiden definitely doesn't. Glitch doesn't. Unless you count street projects which I don't. I don't really know how to classify street projects other than bad.
  Also, it's not a mold. It's an analogy. It's food for thought. And it only works if you've played Ninja Gaiden old and new. If you haven't played both you will have difficulty drawing the conclusion.
  To answer your question...
  What do I want? I want someone at Tiny Speck to read this... play Ninja Gaiden... get inspiration... and go... he's right! And make a change. That's an extreme desire, I know, right? Realistically, it's also to create a dialogue about the problems that I have with Glitch.
  As to your second post... I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me. I'm glad for you? For the rest of the world though, we'd like a fully realized game. FFS, they put the game back in beta after a successful launch. One thing I know... and I think we all agree on... is that team TS wants to make the game greater than what it is right now. And another thing I know is that they listen intently to our input. So, this is my input. If you want to refute change or complain about their adding a story to the game, go ahead. But, I'm telling you right now, if they added more of a story to the game... they'd do it right. To say that no story will ever happen is another very bold statement from you. You've made several in your posts, and I doubt you have anything other than your opinion to back them up.
  -----
  JNNX, word. Also, imma look up this Ungame after making this post.
  -----
  Humbabella... hmmm. Yes the birds. Don't remind me. But, yes, good analogy.
  Also, I see your point... we could compare anything in this goal-oriented vs interaction-oriented approach. There's really no issue there.
  Do people have fun making up their own things to do? Hmmm. I don't think that they have that much fun doing that. I think they want to have fun doing that, but there isn't that much opportunity to do it. I think the bulk majority of your hardcore players of this game are spastics who have OCD and just want to collect for little reason other than to collect. I also think they enjoy chatting. It's an activity you can do while chatting that sates some form of compulsion to press the enter key or click with the mouse. In fact, it's a highly rewarded behaviour in this here game. Almost everything you interact with gives you something as a reward for merely clicking it. Instant gratification.
  The community can show me all of the fun made up things that the creative Glitch community of artists has done, but I doubt anyone had that much fun doing it. I sincerely doubt it. I don't think that's why people continue to play the game. If you genuinely believe that, I think you're delusional. The game uses classic techniques to keep people addicted. It also abuses the 'social' aspect of keeping people hooked.
  Come in, click for hours on end, get stuff, get sucked in... meet people. Get mostly bored with the game, but oh I can't leave my friends! You know that's what happens. It happens with every online game. Even chess.
  Hmmm... the only reason I'm criticizing Glitch. Firstly... that's false. I explained twice why I was. In the original post I said it was food for thought. Later on, I discussed how I call myself a cynical optimist. Think about it.
  Posted 10 months ago by Mr. Dawgg | Permalink
- Have you actually played Eve? There isn't anything in the game that takes more than a month of time to skill up to be effective. If you already have a friend in null sec, you can move there immediately. There is no endgame. Period.
  I'll repeat, it's about horizontal rather than vertical progression, and by the very nature of how that works, by definition, there can be no endgame.
  You input seems to be "glitch could be better." Ok, I fully believe that anything can be better. What's your point?
  As for my second post, that directly addresses your feeling that this game won't be a game unless it provides you gratification rather than ask you to create your own. But since you dismiss the idea that people can make their own fun (thereby dismissing almost every sandbox game that has ever existed and claiming fans of those games are fictional, and pretty much dismissing the entire realm of the pen and paper rpg), I can see how my second post would make no sense to you.
  Your big mistake here---which particularly shines with responses like "keep telling yourself that"---seems to be a belief that only things that are fun for you are actually fun, and only things that you consider games are actually games. And then you actually take a step further and insult anyone who doesn't share those same definitions as you, dismissing them as "spastics who have OCD." But fun is subjective and means different things to different people. You're attempting to dictate to me that I am bored with the game, and that I only stay because I'm addicted to my friendships. Simply not the case, and insisting that I'm lying doesn't actually change my level of enjoyment.
  If I was bored with the game, the social aspect would not keep me hooked. I already have contacts outside this game with many of the people I am close to, and plans to play other games with several of them in the future. I have no need to stay in this game to maintain these friendships. Your perspective is myopic, to put it nicely. You are only seeing your own feelings, and anyone with a different perspective is dismissed---quite literally in your own words---as delusional. I'm surprised you can't see for yourself how unlikely that approach is to actually produce some valuable insight or useful constructive criticism.
  I am not an OCD collector. I'm really not worried about finishing my cubimal collection. I don't care about finishing my doll collection. I chat outside the game with most of the people I chat in the game with. According to your perspective, I can't possibly be real. But I am. And so are many others.
  As for the mold I mentioned, I wasn't clear, but I meant you seem to be applying the mold of other MMOs to this game. Hence even mentioning "endgame" in reference to a sandbox. It really seems to show a lack of familiarity with the entire concept of sandbox.
  Are you the slightest bit familiar with the changes they are trying to make? Do you not feel that those push it more towards being a toy with more rewarding interaction?
  If not, why do you claim to like Glitch when you've pretty much said there's no reason to like Glitch?
  Posted 10 months ago by Red Sauce | Permalink
- You keep saying that your post is "food for thought" but you don't seem to want to take any replies to as as food for thought. You are completely dismissive towards anyone who doesn't agree with you, and you make very bold assumptions that the vast majority feel the same way about the game as you do.
  When you say that you sincerely doubt that people have fun doing the things they made up for themselves to do, I think you should just really stop to consider the possibility that you are totally wrong - that the majority of people who play this game feel completely differently than you about it. I had a lot of fun earning 4.6M favor with Humbaba (I'll admit the last 200k was a bit of a slog and I'm happy to be doing other things). I'm having a lot of fun collecting data and analyzing it. It's hard for me to believe that the people who did the mass shiny drops didn't have fun doing so. I know everyone had fun at the Orange party. People who are still playing Game of Crowns after earning Monarch of the Seven Kingdoms clearly enjoy playing Game of Crowns. Others I know who probe and explore the game in their own ways day after day, getting no currants, xp or items for doing so are not on some crazy achievement-reward treadmill. And it's hard for me to believe that my friends who only play an hour or two a week aren't having fun.
  When you wrote: "Its tricky because you define your own goals and those goals are almost always easy to achieve and require no skill and result with little fanfare or reward," you assumed that everyone else plays the same way as you. When I recently earned the Paul Bunions badge, the fun wasn't clicking tree after tree, the fun was seeing how fast I could actually poison trees - finding an ideal spot to do it, keeping track of my mood constantly, etc. When I started I thought I could only poison a tree every 90 seconds, but by the end I was getting one almost every 30 seconds, and doing so was an engaging activity that was comparably challenging to most action games I've played.
  Lot's of people are defining goals for themselves that are real challenges, and their reward is completing it. The reason people call sandbox games "sandbox" games is because in a sandbox you build your own sand castle and your only reward for building it is having done what you set out to do. I didn't get an achievement in the game for gathering a thousand data points to get one step closer to figuring out how much energy you get when you revere an icon, but I didn't get an in game achievement for getting to Ganon without picking up a sword either in the original Legend of Zelda.
  Glitch could be better than it is, and I think it will be. I just don't understand what you are trying to suggest, and even if you are trying to suggest something, I think that a suggestion that is rooted in the assumption that people do not have fun playing their own way is not going to end up being a good fit for Glitch.
  Posted 10 months ago by Humbabella | Permalink
- Sauceleh,
  (Quickly... I admit I have not played Eve, but I have a friend who talks to me about it, so I understand it fairly well. Even though it may 'only' take a month (a long time by any standard I've had for a video game) to get to a high level in an area... that would then be that area's end game. End game is relative to completing something. Doing work to gain access to content new players aren't going to be able to participate in. I think you're forcing the word 'end game' to have a more restricted meaning whereas I'm using a more liberal meaning. So I apologize for that disconnect. We're both right or both wrong depending on how one interprets the phrase, and I don't really care to discuss 'end game' any further. As I don't really care if there is an end game as much as I care about that there's something to do after doing everything... aside from collect badges.)
  Also... sandbox... hmm. What do you mean precisely? Because MMORPG != Sandbox game intrinsically. Though they always share some similarities. So I take the stance that Glitch is an mmorpg. I say this because of the fact that it's a persistent online world rather than a single player game. Additionally, it has RPG elements such as leveling up and skill trees. And yes, I've played many sand box games including most GTA games (which basically defined the genre), and Just Cause. Both of which are single player and predominantly lack RPG elements. So keep harping about sandbox 'rules' (that you made up) and keep being wrong.
  "As for my second post, that directly addresses your feeling that this game won't be a game unless it provides you gratification rather than ask you to create your own. "
  I never said that or insinuated that I felt that way. I said that it doesn't do a good job of rewarding the player for completing his own goals. That is because you don't get anything and it's not hard to do. In Ninja Gaiden, you get a cool cutscene after a difficult boss fight which was the climax of a difficult level. While you didn't make your own goal, that's irrelevant. The goals you create in Glitch are just time sinks.
  "Your big mistake here---which particularly shines with responses like "keep telling yourself that"---seems to be a belief that only things that are fun for you are actually fun, and only things that you consider games are actually games."
  No. I provided a good reason for a game being a game and a toy being a toy. Here it is again. If the activity is done to 'win' then it's a game. If something has no goal, but you do it for fun, it's like a toy. I really don't see the issue with this. I realize it's a simplification, but it's a usable definition. I see Glitch as both having toy and game aspects. But I see it them unrealized fully.
  "And then you actually take a step further and insult anyone who doesn't share those same definitions as you, dismissing them as "spastics who have OCD.""
  If anyone took offense, I apologize. Though, I didn't direct it at anyone and I didn't say everyone. I said the bulk majority. That doesn't mean everyone, and it certainly doesn't include you two. If you do have OCD, I know someone who does, so I understand it from the outside looking in. If you are a spastic, you probably know it. I use it to mean someone who is constantly fidgeting or otherwise really hyper. I don't know what other meanings it has, but I didn't mean it as an insult.
  "You're attempting to dictate to me that I am bored with the game, and that I only stay because I'm addicted to my friendships."
  Nope. I'm saying the bulk majority are. I have no idea why you continue to play. Wait. Yes I do. You made a very emotional post about it and I said that I was glad for you. Remember that? So you have my approval. Good for you. You're a smart person and play the game for smart people reasons. +1 and Thumbs Up. Let me leave a basket at your door when I log in next time.
  "If not, why do you claim to like Glitch when you've pretty much said there's no reason to like Glitch? "
  I never once said that. Or even insinuated that. Reread the original post rather than make bold statements like that. The thread didn't really draw many conclusions except that it does some things that Ninja Gaiden does... but it does them worse. It's food for thought. If it made you think, cool. If it made you steel your resolve about how great Glitch is, then you missed the point. Which is fine. You can think Glitch is perfect. But, if I got even just one person to go, hmm, he has a point. I did a good job in my opinion.
  Humbabella,
  "You keep saying that your post is "food for thought" but you don't seem to want to take any replies to as as food for thought."
  Why should I. And for the record, I did. I thought about what you had to say. But, the thing is. Your posts weren't food for thought. You were trying to refute what I had to say. That's not food for thought. My post wasn't going for anyone's throat. It was merely a post to get people to maybe think about Glitch in a radically different way. If you did, cool. If you didn't, I don't care. All good. If you come here and then try to refute what I'm trying to say, don't make it about me. Make it about the analogy. But then don't expect me to read your post and go, oh yeah, she's right by virtue of being a smart person. And don't expect me to value your opinion. Because I probably won't. Just like you could give less care about my opinion.
  "When you say that you sincerely doubt that people have fun doing the things they made up for themselves to do, I think you should just really stop to consider the possibility that you are totally wrong - that the majority of people who play this game feel completely differently than you about it. "
  I won't. Because I know they don't. I think there is a crowd of people that think they're highly creative Glitch artists who do things in the game and the gain some level of satisfaction from it. But the thing is, that isn't the majority. I don't have numbers. I'm just using my intuition. Also, I've been in very heated arguments about every bit of 'art' that the Glitch artists make. So, I'm well aware of the activities you guys do.
  "People who are still playing Game of Crowns after earning Monarch of the Seven Kingdoms clearly enjoy playing Game of Crowns. Others I know who probe and explore the game in their own ways day after day, getting no currants, xp or items for doing so are not on some crazy achievement-reward treadmill. And it's hard for me to believe that my friends who only play an hour or two a week aren't having fun."
  As for GoC/Races, I love that content. They're fun. I'd still be playing them if enough people were good at it. But Glitch players (not all) tend to be afraid of things that require skill. It also was glitchy. As an aside, I think the people who created the group to harvest the badges from GoC are immoral. It also serves my argument. That is, that you have a large group of people that just get badges just from OCD-esque reasons.
  "When I recently earned the Paul Bunions badge, the fun wasn't clicking tree after tree, the fun was seeing how fast I could actually poison trees - finding an ideal spot to do it, keeping track of my mood constantly, etc. When I started I thought I could only poison a tree every 90 seconds, but by the end I was getting one almost every 30 seconds, and doing so was an engaging activity that was comparably challenging to most action games I've played."
  No offense, but that's not skill. I wasn't trying to get a badge. I was going into Ix every day to replant spice. My 'goal' was an all spice Ix. I would go there every day and clean up Ix. The problem is that my interaction with the world was insignificant and meaningless. The reward was none except it sated am OCD-esque desire. And yeah, it's not hard to figure out how to poison efficiently. If you really think you stumbled on some form of high cognitive process, I have to pull you back to reality and help you to realize you're being very generous with your own assessment of the situation. Also, play Ninja Gaiden again and tell me that figuring out how to poison is even remotely as hard as that game. Remember this is about Ninja Gaiden.
  "Lot's of people are defining goals for themselves that are real challenges, and their reward is completing it."
  Because it takes hours of doing an unskilled activity doesn't mean it's a challenge. I mean... maybe if you said... do it within so much time? Maybe I don't know. I'm sure there are some challenges to be had. But nothing really that challenging.
  "The reason people call sandbox games "sandbox" games is because in a sandbox you build your own sand castle and your only reward for building it is having done what you set out to do."
  Another bold claim based purely on your interpretation and opinion. I've never heard that. I understand your rationale, but it has nothing to do with building a sand castle. The more likely source of the term comes from sandbox in software development. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandb... Though, I cannot state with 100% veracity as to that. If you think about it, though, I hope you'd agree. But you can believe what you want to believe as well.
  "I just don't understand what you are trying to suggest, and even if you are trying to suggest something, I think that a suggestion that is rooted in the assumption that people do not have fun playing their own way is not going to end up being a good fit for Glitch. "
  I wasn't suggesting anything. I was providing a different perspective.
  My assumption is that most people come to play Glitch and are overwhelmed initially then underwhelmed rapidly. A select few stay. I feel I know why. You think you know why. Either way, I believe there are more people like me. Just as you believe there are more people like you.
  Posted 10 months ago by Mr. Dawgg | Permalink
- Also... sandbox... hmm. What do you mean precisely? Because MMORPG != Sandbox game intrinsically.
  Bingo. Why are we having this thread, again? Glitch is a sandbox, not a MMORPG. The 'quests' are skill tutorials. The 'badges' are a diversion for people who enjoy collecting them. Like the dolls and cubimals.
  Posted 10 months ago by Polo Reede | Permalink
- Glitch Hard vs, Ninja Gaiden Hard - The Ninja Gaiden series is widely regarded as very hard. It is really a niche series of games tailored towards people who like to play really hard games and have a challenge. But that is a niche. Hard games can be really awesome and feel very rewarding to play, but they certainly aren't for everyone. I stand by the claim that efficient poisoning is akin to a lot of action games in difficulty (at first you do okay, then you do better and after a few hours of practice it's not that hard but the flow of the task can be engaging) - not to Ninja Gaiden, but I certainly don't think that the appeal of Glitch would be increased by going extremely hard.
  Perseverance is Difficult - There is way too much tendency among skilled gamers to think that the only things that are hard are things that require intense reflexes and cognitive practices. If that was true then we would all run marathons. The only thing standing between an average person and the ability to run a marathon is perseverance. The common response is (when examples in games are used), "But I don't want to do that." Of course you don't, but the fact that you don't want to doesn't make something easy. I don't want to win every Ninja Gaiden game tonight, but that doesn't change the fact that I probably couldn't pull it off if I tried. The question is, is Desert Bus hard? I think Desert Bus should be considered insanely hard. Not that any game should try to be like Desert Bus, but there are kinds of challenge that don't involve intense second to second action, and there are people out there who enjoy those kinds of challenges. Human beings don't have indomitable wills, if you decide to move 1000 paper clips from one box to another, slowly, one at a time you will probably fail (if you succeed then you have an iron will and good on you) - it doesn't matter that you failed because you decided it was stupid or awful anymore than it matters that someone didn't make the NBA because they thought basketball was stupid and awful.
  Who are Glitch Players? My real life friends played Glitch for a little bit and then left, and pretty much for many of the reasons you point out. They didn't see the point of leveling up because there was no real value in going up levels. They started off by playing lots of hour so they very quickly played through the quests and explored the world, they didn't find anything in the game particularly hard, they decided they had all they wanted from it and left. They aren't Glitch players because they don't play Glitch. I say this in the same way that I say I am not a chess player, despite the fact that I played chess for several years and know all the rules. If you wanted to survey chess players to find out what they like and don't like about chess, you shouldn't ask me because I don't actually choose to play chess. Note that I completely agree that the lack of challenges presented to you by the game (as opposed to challenges you make yourself) will drive a lot of people away from the game as I know a lot of people it drove away from the game. One of the things people who disagree with you have been saying is that those people aren't really the sort of people Glitch was made for - this doesn't mean Glitch isn't legitimate (compare to the Sims - a hugely successful franchise).
  What Does Liking Something Mean - I just find it hard to believe that the majority of people who voluntarily and without any hope or promise of real-world compensation participate in an activity don't like participating in it. Certain branches of sociology, economics and philosophy would even define that as the way we know what people like. In order to say that people don't like such at thing, I feel like we'd have to really drill down on what we mean by what people like, because it sounds like some kind of deep-down-inside-whether-they-know-it-or-not thing. I could see how you might say that someone who does something to self-medicate a mental illness might feel compelled to do that thing without liking that thing. I still find it bold to suggest that that characterizes the majority of Glitch players (even for a very light definition of "mental illness"). Maybe there are good examples of cases where people consistently behave this way - do something they don't like despite the fact that they have no belief that it will give them any benefit (and your intuition that people don't like something doesn't count as evidence that they don't like it for this purpose, there has to be credible reason to believe that people don't like it).
  But now on to some specific quotations, because I feel like the rhetoric is really going off the rails,
  "I won't. Because I know they don't. I think there is a crowd of people that think they're highly creative Glitch artists who do things in the game and the gain some level of satisfaction from it. But the thing is, that isn't the majority. I don't have numbers. I'm just using my intuition. Also, I've been in very heated arguments about every bit of 'art' that the Glitch artists make. So, I'm well aware of the activities you guys do."
  You said, "I won't [consider that most people who play this game feel differently]. Because I know they don't," followed by "I don't have numbers. I'm just using my intuition." If your intuition gives you certain knowledge, then I don't understand why you even post food for thought and invite feedback. Just intuit the truth. Also, where are the heated arguments about what I do - I would probably like to participate.
  "No offense, but that's not skill. And yeah, it's not hard to figure out how to poison efficiently. If you really think you stumbled on some form of high cognitive process, I have to pull you back to reality and help you to realize you're being very generous with your own assessment of the situation."
  I'm pretty sure when a person starts a sentence with "no offense" that is almost always code for, "I am saying what I am about to say with the intention upset or belittle you." Poisoning trees efficiently is not an act of genius and it is not the pinnacle of my gaming achievements, but it *felt* like playing a game and it was a little game I made up for myself to play. I have the achievement system to thank for urging me to discover this activity, I don't have it to blame for forcing me to do something I didn't want to do (I am probably never going to have the Game of Crowns badges).
  Me - "The reason people call sandbox games "sandbox" games is because in a sandbox you build your own sand castle and your only reward for building it is having done what you set out to do."
  You - "Another bold claim based purely on your interpretation and opinion. I've never heard that. I understand your rationale, but it has nothing to do with building a sand castle. The more likely source of the term comes from sandbox in software development. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandb... Though, I cannot state with 100% veracity as to that. If you think about it, though, I hope you'd agree. But you can believe what you want to believe as well."
  So it turns out I really didn't say what I wanted to say with that sentence. It should have said that sandbox games are called sandbox games as an analogy to a sandbox, and then gone on to say the stuff about the sand castles and getting no reward from them. I suppose by making this mistake I invited a discussion of the etymology of the term "sandbox" as applied to games, but it startles me that your opinion is that the term does not originate with real life sandboxes. It may well have come through the programming jargon, however that programming jargon almost certainly originated as an analogy to sandboxes (which are boxed off places to play around with things, just like the programming space and which happen to bear the same name).
  Posted 10 months ago by Humbabella | Permalink
- Humbabella,
  Sometimes I say 'I know' when I don't really know. That's why I stated that I was just using my intuition. It's guided me quite well through life. I am good at seeing through BS. So, no. I don't know with absolute certainty, but I have a good hunch.
  "Perseverance is Difficult..." etc
  I agree. But, do you really want to praise someone for moving 1000 paper clips from one box to another? Simply because it required perseverance? I wouldn't. Now, if someone made 1000 baskets from the free throw line, that is impressive. (Even if you don't like basketball.)
  "One of the things people who disagree with you have been saying is that those people aren't really the sort of people Glitch was made for - this doesn't mean Glitch isn't legitimate (compare to the Sims - a hugely successful franchise)."
  Wow. Sims Online failed buddy.
  Now as for The Sims itself... the single player game. That game wasn't really challenging. But man was there a ton to play with. Personally, I use to just cheat money so I could build cool houses. That game was very much more a toy.
  Now... this comes up from you guys all the time. This notion that Glitch is only designed for a small subset of people. You. Your friends. These people are highly intellectual people who are able to apply special meaning to highly menial tasks and badges that are awarded for doing said tasks.
  Describe to me the type of person Glitch was made for, Humbabella. I'd like to know.
  What does liking something mean? Hmm. You're saying by virtue of doing something, someone likes it. Surely you agree that's a problematic stance, so you clarify by saying by doing something that provides no 'real world compensation' that person almost has to like it. Well! Why else would he do it?
  You forget peer pressure. You forget the desire to belong. You forget compulsion. You forget OCD. All of these are going to govern a person's behavior over reason or 'liking' something. I'm not an expert on behavior by any stretch (and little learning is a dangerous thing, I know), but even I know about this. Surely, you have to know about these factors as well. Be intellectually honest. Few people's actions are governed by reason over unconscious compulsion. Surely you've bought something on impulse or done something you later regretted. People do things for reasons they can't understand.
  For the record... I just want to repeat... there is a lot to like about Glitch at large. I'm just using my intuition in regards to making Glitch 'art.' Or gaining badges. Or doing any task that requires doing a lot of menial tasks. I'm also not against it if someone does it for whatever reasons he wants to do it. Go for it. But, I don't think that's the type of game play that will make the game great.
  ---
  Polo, show me where on this page: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glitc... that it says sandbox. It doesn't. Also, show me where it says MMO. Oh yeah... the first line. Feel free to edit it since you know more than whoever edited it the first time. Just make sure you change the source of the first line (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-10449721-52.html). Or leave it. Who fact checks before making bold claims anyways these days?
  ------
  "So it turns out I really didn't say what I wanted to say with that sentence. It should have said that sandbox games are called sandbox games as an analogy to a sandbox, and then gone on to say the stuff about the sand castles and getting no reward from them. I suppose by making this mistake I invited a discussion of the etymology of the term "sandbox" as applied to games, but it startles me that your opinion is that the term does not originate with real life sandboxes. It may well have come through the programming jargon, however that programming jargon almost certainly originated as an analogy to sandboxes (which are boxed off places to play around with things, just like the programming space and which happen to bear the same name). "-Humbabella
  I suppose all tech jargon has to have some rationale behind it. Explain 'killer ap.' Was the first one lethal? Explain the word 'hacking.' Does it have something to do with using an ax or maybe hacking up a fur ball? Explain
  Sandbox... it absolutely must have been inspired by someone playing in a sandbox. Or, more likely, as tech jargon, it only has a loose connection to its literal meaning.
  While there is a loose connection there... certainly. As you said... this is a discussion of etymology. But the thing that is important is that you guys need to stop drawing conclusions based on the concept that Glitch is like playing in a sandbox literally. It's not. Even if it were a sandbox game, that doesn't mean that you get to relate activities in a sandbox to it. It's misguided.
  I got more but I'll type it later.
  Posted 10 months ago by Mr. Dawgg | Permalink
- +++++++ Humbabella & Saucelah and others.. and bravo for your efforts. It's important to realize that the OP's posts historically, inevitably end up being ongoing "gotcha" fests and huge suck holes of negativity, however much the OP might feign sincerity or attempt to disguising her/his purpose for posting in the first place. One can post responses until the sky turns green and experience is no longer existential.. My time is better spent just enjoying the game.. which I do :) Damn.. I need to replace my butterfies! Gotta go :)
  Posted 10 months ago by Joni Mitchell | Permalink
- His*
  And for the record, despite what this thread is about, Mr. Dawgg believes that TS can make the game, 'gamier'. And relaunch successfully.
  Posted 10 months ago by Rook | Permalink
- Dog:
  The link you cite says MMO. I don't think anybody in this discussion would argue Glitch isn't Massive, Multiplayer, or Online. My point seems to have shot over your head. Glitch isn't a Role Playing Game. Not at all, anyway, in the sense that you intend in your lurid assertion that Glitch is an MMORPG.
  You appear to be stuck on the 20th century generes. Do some research on what is meant by the term 'sandbox' in modern gaming lingo and stop trying to frame everything as being an updated equivalent to a cartridge you played on your vintage Nintendo console.
  Posted 10 months ago by Polo Reede | Permalink
- "I agree. But, do you really want to praise someone for moving 1000 paper clips from one box to another? Simply because it required perseverance? I wouldn't. Now, if someone made 1000 baskets from the free throw line, that is impressive. (Even if you don't like basketball.)"
  So you don't agree. A task that requires manual dexterity and skillful execution as well as perseverance seems like challenge worth praising you while one that requires only perseverance does not.
  "Now... this comes up from you guys all the time. This notion that Glitch is only designed for a small subset of people. You. Your friends. These people are highly intellectual people who are able to apply special meaning to highly menial tasks and badges that are awarded for doing said tasks. Describe to me the type of person Glitch was made for, Humbabella. I'd like to know."
  Apparently, the majority of people who play WoW (the most successful subscription based online game) don't even reach maximum level, or if they do, never participate in any end-game content. Less than 1% of those who played before the first expansion entered raid dungeons despite the fact that the majority of developer time after release went into developing these. Also, it turns out most players of online games never even look at the forums (see a great description of this from Tobold)
  If Glitch is going to be successful in the long run then the majority of it's players are going to be people who do not play obsessively, who just long in to have fun every now and then, probably less than four hours a week. There will always be enough for them to do because it will take months before they even explore the streets in the world, months for them to complete all the quests, and with the new housing system they will have something to do essentially forever. What will appeal to them is the non-violent part of the game, the adorable graphics, playing dress-up with their glitchen, and decorating their houses (the last two of which will be Tiny Speck's bread and butter). They will not care about either side of this conversation.
  They will not be the high-concept glitch artists or the compulsive unfortunates - both of these groups are rare. You like to spend a fair bit of time posting in an on-line forum for a game about how only people with mental disorders play the game. I like to spend a lot of time posting in an on-line forum for a game responding to the same topic - not to mention spending a lot of time making spreadsheets about that same game for fun. I think it is a safe guess that the majority of people have radically different tastes than both of us.
  "You forget peer pressure. You forget the desire to belong. You forget compulsion. You forget OCD."
  Rather than forgetting those things, I specifically mentioned the latter two. I didn't bring up the former two because I agree with your premise from your first post that successful social communities develop out of good games, not the other way around - basically if Glitch is a lousy game that no one likes there will be no community to apply peer pressure.
  I'm not trying to say that I think people know what makes them truly happy, for the most part we don't, but I don't think Glitch is going to be a source of deep fulfillment. Speculating about what people like to do (that may be making them unhappy in the long run) is a hard thing to do, and for the most part if you asked an economist or a sociologist they really would use a revealed preferences method. Look at what people actually do with their time and you'll see what they like (after eliminating those things they clearly do to acquire benefits for themselves). To try to argue against that I think you need something more compelling than intuition. Like I said, I am struggling to think of a non-Glitch example where people behave this way. Surely Glitch is not a unique phenomenon in this regard. Or maybe you are suggesting this is a commonality of multi-player online games? Compulsive need to grow tings and increase numbers can be satisfied by the majority of online games, so I don't think it's a good explanation of why people are playing Glitch.
  On Sandboxes:"But the thing that is important is that you guys need to stop drawing conclusions based on the concept that Glitch is like playing in a sandbox literally. It's not. Even if it were a sandbox game, that doesn't mean that you get to relate activities in a sandbox to it. It's misguided."
  I don't draw conclusions based on the fact that Glitch is like playing in a sandbox - I use a sandbox as an analogy to explain the kind of thing that some people find fun in Glitch. What a lot of people understand it to mean (and hence, what people mean when they use it) is that the game is in some way analogous to a sandbox. People have all kinds of debates online about what that means. I've even read people who say that it's not a real sandbox unless someone else can come and kick what you've made over. It doesn't really matter what anyone thinks the term "sandbox" when applied to video games is supposed to mean.
  Glitch is not subordinate to the concept of sandbox, so it really doesn't matter what it means. Presumably Tiny Speck wants Glitch to be fun, engaging and unique (among other things). If being a "sandbox" got in the way of those things because of what being a "sandbox" meant then the concept of sandbox would go. "Sandbox" is useful so long as it is a useful analogy. In this thread it has been used to explain the kind of fun that some people are having in the game - fun based on doing, achieving only for yourself. As far as I can tell, you completely understand that some people (not necessarily all that many) are having fun in this way, so further argument about "sandbox" seems tangential. Most adults don't want to play in sandboxes anyway.
  Posted 10 months ago by Humbabella | Permalink
- When I say you're not familiar with the term sandbox, I meant you're not familiar with the term sandbox as MMO jargon. Professional MMO news sites, such as Massively, have columns dedicated to sandbox MMOs. Professional writers and amateur bloggers have divided the MMO genre into two sub-genres since about 2004: theme park and sandbox. If you want to claim that MMOs cannot be sandboxes, you're fighting an uphill battle that was lost 8 years ago.
  You haven't played Eve. Ok. Well, while it may take a month to be effective at a given task, you start with that task immediately. So if everything in the game, since everything takes a month to be effective, counts as endgame, that's pretty much removing all meaning from the term, and the equivalent of saying there is no endgame.
  So no Eve. Have you played A Tale in the Desert? Have you played Wurm Online? Did you play SWG prior to the NGE? Do you have any context at all for this conversation?
  From your recent idea thread, you do not seem to be familiar with any of the directions TS plans to take this game, yet seek to level criticism that takes none of that into account, sort of making the entire thread pointless. Well, not sort of, it is pointless -- you have some reading to do before you should be directing criticism at this beta, even though it is beta part deux.
  As for making the game gamier, boy I hope not. They seem to be making it toy-ier, and that's why I'm here. That's how, in at least one interview, Stoot explained he was able to convince KT to come back to game design from his work on designing playgrounds -- he sold KT on Glitch as a virtual playground (and sold Vancouver as a place that hadn't had a recent nuclear meltdown, though that's just the cherry on top). That's why I support the game. That's why I promote the game. That's why I've tipped Massively to information released by Tiny Speck. That's why I write almost exclusively about this game when I'm not pondering MMO jargon.
  Yes, that makes me---like you and Humbabella---not the average player of this game. But it also makes me yet another type of player you refuse to consider, yet another who finds enjoyment in things you cannot understand. For the myopia alone, I imagine Tiny Speck isn't going to put much weight on your feedback. But given that they are neck deep in development priorities that will change the game radically, I imagine they're not going to put any weight on any criticism leveled at the game as is, and if you truly have a positive mission here---and are not just employing a semi-elitist denial of enjoyments you don't understand---then you might want to just walk away until April or May, long after the changes are in place, when the game is in a form that is actually worth criticizing.
  Posted 10 months ago by Red Sauce | Permalink
- But really, you should probably just find yourself a nice theme park MMO that guides you to the fun and provides you with external gratifications for completing it, rather than expect Glitch to become that game.
  Posted 10 months ago by Red Sauce | Permalink
- The Dawwg's supposition that his quest to create an Ix populated entirely by spice trees was meaningless is based on the fact that he failed at it. If The Dawwg had the right sort of skills in Glitch, I have no doubt that there would be only Spice Trees in Ix. Glitch is -exactly- the kind of game where an off-the-wall goal like "there should be only spice trees in Ix" could be accomplished.
  Perhaps Mr. The Dawwg needs to consider what skills it would take to successfully create an IX that held only Spice Trees. I don't think it's the skills of insulting and demeaning others that achieves that sort of goal. I don't think it's an aittitude of "My Way or the Highway" that achieves that sort of goal.
  I do think, however, that a Spice Tree only Ix _could_ be accomplished by several of the players I've already met in this game, if that became a goal they had in mind.
  And what would be the reward? The reward would come the day that player was sitting in Global and someone said "Oh my god there is a Bubble Tree in IX!" and four players shouted "That's not right! I'll be right there!" The player could sit back, smile, and quietly congratulate themselves on a job well done.
  Posted 10 months ago by HeyGabe | Permalink