innerdude
Legend
There's definitely something to your thoughts there, @niklinna -- In the original Guild Wars 1, the height of the fun in the "campaign" missions came right around Level 14-15. It was the big boss run in the "wintery" area whose name eludes me.
You had enough skills at that point that you could use a variety of tactics, yet you weren't so overpowered that you had to be shoehorned into "high power" engagements every other minute.
Everything after that, scaling up to level 25, was really just an emotional letdown / downslope.
The thing I remember disliking about Guild Wars 1 was that the last 2 campaigns required hyper-specialization. And to a point, that's a test of player skill, right? Which shouldn't be a bad thing. I.e., how well have you incorporated your knowledge of your skills/abilities into your play?
But there was a definite lack of luster on the final 2 campaign missions, as I recall. Again, since specialization was key, you're forced into situations you haven't prepared for or practiced much of the time, or forced to use secondary classes that you wouldn't normally consider. Every combat becomes a brutal slog. Finishing the missions was really more a sense of relief than accomplishment.
Which leads into . . . .
Part 3 - Player expectations / player engagement
I can't help but feeling that a big takeaway from this experience is that as a GM, forcing the agenda becomes problematic at just about every level. The agenda for the final battle of Jedi Survivor is, "Fight this battle in the way we, the developers, have deemed to be the most enjoyable, challenging, and appropriate for the moment."
But what would that look like as a TTRPG mindset?
"You will engage in solving this problem using the methods and formulations I've devised, no more, no less."
"You'll fight this combat now because it's what I've determined is 'correct' based on setting and circumstance."
"Your attempts to sidestep this challenge will fail because this must be the challenge to be faced in the way I've set it up."
"My 'living world' turning of the wheel deems this is exactly what must happen, regardless of fun factor or engagement with player stakes."
One of the most beautiful things about the video game Deus Ex --- my favorite video game of all time --- is that it provided solution paths for nearly every character build. Hacking, sleuthing, combat, sneaking. There was always a way to approach a situation that fed into a character strength. Was it realistic, in the verisimilitude sense? Probably not, but it didn't matter, because my ability to engage the situation was meaningful. I didn't care that it was unrealistic that terrorists would leave random emails with passwords on the servers, because I was rewarded for taking a particular approach.
You had enough skills at that point that you could use a variety of tactics, yet you weren't so overpowered that you had to be shoehorned into "high power" engagements every other minute.
Everything after that, scaling up to level 25, was really just an emotional letdown / downslope.
The thing I remember disliking about Guild Wars 1 was that the last 2 campaigns required hyper-specialization. And to a point, that's a test of player skill, right? Which shouldn't be a bad thing. I.e., how well have you incorporated your knowledge of your skills/abilities into your play?
But there was a definite lack of luster on the final 2 campaign missions, as I recall. Again, since specialization was key, you're forced into situations you haven't prepared for or practiced much of the time, or forced to use secondary classes that you wouldn't normally consider. Every combat becomes a brutal slog. Finishing the missions was really more a sense of relief than accomplishment.
Which leads into . . . .
Part 3 - Player expectations / player engagement
I can't help but feeling that a big takeaway from this experience is that as a GM, forcing the agenda becomes problematic at just about every level. The agenda for the final battle of Jedi Survivor is, "Fight this battle in the way we, the developers, have deemed to be the most enjoyable, challenging, and appropriate for the moment."
But what would that look like as a TTRPG mindset?
"You will engage in solving this problem using the methods and formulations I've devised, no more, no less."
"You'll fight this combat now because it's what I've determined is 'correct' based on setting and circumstance."
"Your attempts to sidestep this challenge will fail because this must be the challenge to be faced in the way I've set it up."
"My 'living world' turning of the wheel deems this is exactly what must happen, regardless of fun factor or engagement with player stakes."
One of the most beautiful things about the video game Deus Ex --- my favorite video game of all time --- is that it provided solution paths for nearly every character build. Hacking, sleuthing, combat, sneaking. There was always a way to approach a situation that fed into a character strength. Was it realistic, in the verisimilitude sense? Probably not, but it didn't matter, because my ability to engage the situation was meaningful. I didn't care that it was unrealistic that terrorists would leave random emails with passwords on the servers, because I was rewarded for taking a particular approach.
