Why do devs always seem to think that the solution to whining players is to nerf? It never ends, it only gets worse. Even if you started with a perfectly balanced game, someone would still whine about some imagined superiority of another class/race/gender/weapon/hairball.
Look at D&D, for instance. They had a great game until they started listening to players whining about how arcane casters are "OP". (What these whining players fail to understand in this case is that arcane casters have a low survivability early-game in exchange for more power end-game.) Then they came out with 4th edition - the worst excuse for a tabletop game I have ever had the misfortune to even consider playing. In response, a group of unsatisfied players developed Pathfinder - much like 3rd edition, but with some great additions. These additions balanced each class very well, without the need to remove anything that was in 3rd edition D&D.
The moral: nerfing hurts the game far more than it hurts the players because it hurts players.
Another moral: in WotC vs Pathfinder, a US court set the precedent that a game system cannot be copyrighted; the same fate can befall ANY game that follows the same pattern.
I do not want to see AO turn out like D&D. There's plenty of space to fill things out for all profs and the majority of players just want to see some cool new toys to liven things up. Whiners either want attention (new content) or better rewards for less work.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by brokennex
