Spiral Knights - Why I don't play this any more

Why I don't play this any more

19 replies [Last post]

Fri, 03/20/2015 - 20:15

Ashen-Shugar

1. Everything's gotten way too grindy. It wasn't too bad, back when you just had to grind for energy, crowns, heat, and a few crafting materials. Now you have to grind for orbs and shards as well - just to do the same things we used to do without grinding for them. Yeah, it sucked having to use energy just to use the lift, but we got the mist energy for free, so it wasn't too bad.

2. The only actual new level types I can remember since I started playing suck. They suck so bad that frequently, players will wait for a different level type rather than play them, which can mean 5-10 minutes of doing nothing. These levels are Candlestick Keep and the stupid Burrows. Yes, people would literally rather sit around doing NOTHING than play these. These levels sucked when they were first released, however long ago that was (probably a couple years by now). They still suck. Why are they still here? The game would literally be more fun if they were simply removed. Where's some new content that's actually good?

3. Way too much crap is monetized. Seriously, this is a game that is *made* to be monetized with cosmetics and fluff. I mean, there's so much potential there compared to other games like LoL or TF2, why does every little thing have to be nickle-and-dime or spend endless hours grinding? Where are the permanent weapon and trinket slot upgrades?

I never actually "quit" this game, so much as just lost interest and stopped playing. Tried playing it again the last couple days, and nothing's changed since the last time I tried a few months ago. It's still the same grindy pile of crap it became over the last few years. Maybe it's time to finally cut the cord completely.

Fri, 03/20/2015 - 20:41

Fehzor

I actually really enjoy compounds (what you called burrows) and candlestick keep. I do not enjoy the payout of compounds or see the payout of candlestick keep as being high enough to seek out, but I do enjoy playing on the levels. Compounds in particular was always a really nice change of pace for me whenever I encountered it- the game went from focusing on small 3-5 enemy encounters to being much more centered on area of effect. If only the loot wasn't so awful..

The game would be considerably less grindy if it weren't for those radiant fire crystals but because they are here you are very much correct in that everything's gotten too grindy. I'd point to the events as examples of less grind and more fun, but 10,000 sigils and 6 whiskers have something to say about that.. so yes, the game does feel very monetized.

Fri, 03/20/2015 - 22:40

Almond-Riddle

Mist energy got a lot of flak

Mist energy got a lot of flak because it was punishing to new players who want to play a lot, while indirectly rewarding you for being a largely inactive player. It wasn't so bad after you got around to the end of tier 2, where you could farm JK for more energy to replace the energy you used up for the elevator.

The new system basically got rid of all of the restrictions, but it created a new problem. People were progressing too fast now that they didn't have to pay energy for elevators. If people were to progress too fast, they would cap out even faster. And if they capped out (not necessarily to do everything the game has to offer, but to just reach a high enough level that they're satisfied with) they'll stop playing.

Mist energy also turned off a lot of people from playing this game.

So you either have people quitting because they don't like mist energy, or people quitting because they don't like the grind, or people quitting because they've capped out, or people leaving because the game is too hard, or people leaving because the game is too easy. No matter what they do, it's a lose lose situation. OOO has no way to improve the game in a way that would leave everyone satisfied.

The only improvement I can think of that wouldn't hurt anyone off the top of my head is to make compounds give out the same amount of boxes as danger rooms :v

Also, candlestick keep isn't that hard. It's one of those levels that are easier to play solo than in a party though.

Fri, 03/20/2015 - 23:28

Alienf

what i think

OOO, needs to add more content, more story, a new boss asap, or something, all i have seen them do is make a new kind of prize box and more decro...
at this point, i think they just want money until no one plays this game anymore. and i was playing this since.. 2011

Sat, 03/21/2015 - 06:29

Bopp

same old thing

This thread has been made a hundred times.

This game is not supposed to supply your complete entertainment for the rest of your life. When you are done with it, go do something else.

If you don't like the monetized accessories, then ignore them. You're not being forced to buy anything.

Sat, 03/21/2015 - 10:38

Fangel

Oh hey this thread again

Candlestick keeps actually aren't too bad in terms of rewards. Whenever a black kat event comes around I'm reminded of that. Compounds, on the other hand, don't reward you enough for the challenge they present. They only really lack boxes though, so if those crowns at the end of the levels were boxes I think they'd be worthwhile to play through.

That's what the game is about right? Playing enough to overcome what's hard and become good at it? Not to grind the same missions over and over for in-game wealth so you can get better gear to grind the same level for more money...

The grind in this game isn't so bad, and before mist was removed, you didn't realize you were grinding. You either A)used all your mist energy and stopped playing for the day (1.5-2 hours of gameplay per day), or B)used the crowns you've earned to buy more crystal energy so you can play the same mission again and get more crystal energy etc. etc... It's still grinding there, just it's limited grinding. Now-a-days, we have unlimited elevators, so we can grind for hours on end and it feels more like a job unless you're doing it for fun.

This game is based around monetization because, low and behold, we make in-game currency for playing the game. You trade your playtime for upgrades, and if you want, real money for playtime. In TF2 there is no progressional system (i.e., end tier gear), and I don't play League of Legends, however I assume there's no system like this either there. You make money per game in LoL, and you spend it per game. You find random items in TF2, and can trade them if you feel. Those games don't have a universal currency system (that I know of), thus you don't see as many things monetized since there's no need to make players spend their money.

Sat, 03/21/2015 - 11:44

Fehzor

I disagree with this because I think that progression and building an arsenal are some of the most fun things this game has to offer. If the game wants to keep players interested in it then it should seek to facilitate this fun, rather than slow it down and snuff it out. There are tons of items to go for before you "cap out" and tons of fun to be had.. but if you slow that fun to the point where it becomes more of a grind? Then people aren't going to stay and play your game. No one wants to play the game when it becomes a chore to play, and that's what the game has become- a chore.

Sat, 03/21/2015 - 16:16

Alienf

and I don't play League of

and I don't play League of Legends, however I assume there's no system like this either there. You make money per game in LoL, and you spend it per game.
^
i play league so i can tell you, basically certain amount of IP per game which you can save up and spend on new champions or runes, or rune pages for your builds
so you can play league without ever spending a dime, but there's skins (some of them are pretty good) which people spend RP on which is how they make their money.
xd

and @ fehzor, yeah... mist was annoying, i dont mind grinding, got friends on here, and a guild.

Mon, 03/23/2015 - 07:19

Lokits

Not to be rude or anything i am a knight starting out accepting crowns energy donations :)

Thu, 03/26/2015 - 02:39

The-Vindicar

@Lokits

...you better not be serious.

Thu, 03/26/2015 - 06:13

#10

Jmmoormann

Ultimate example of bullsh*t

"1. Everything's gotten way too grindy. It wasn't too bad, back when you just had to grind for energy, crowns, heat, and a few crafting materials. Now you have to grind for orbs and shards as well - just to do the same things we used to do without grinding for them. Yeah, it sucked having to use energy just to use the lift, but we got the mist energy for free, so it wasn't too bad."

You probably stand almost alone in this. I recently looked for some reviews on SK, and most (from the mist age) said the same: it is a great game, but like so many others you are capped in how much you can play. Removing mist was probably the best thing they have ever done, and (for active players) there aren't any cons. Like Almond-Riddle already said, inactive players would benefit from it, but I think it's righteous that active players get rewarded more than inactive players.

"2. The only actual new level types I can remember since I started playing suck. They suck so bad that frequently, players will wait for a different level type rather than play them, which can mean 5-10 minutes of doing nothing. These levels are Candlestick Keep and the stupid Burrows. Yes, people would literally rather sit around doing NOTHING than play these. These levels sucked when they were first released, however long ago that was (probably a couple years by now). They still suck. Why are they still here? The game would literally be more fun if they were simply removed. Where's some new content that's actually good?"

Candlestick Keep and Compounds aren't that bad. Maybe they are a little bit harder compared to some other levels, but I like the new mechanics they have introduced: Candlestick with its "Run for your life" and compounds with the huge swarms of minis (although I agree the payout should be increased). And maybe you didn't realize yet, but OOO somehow needs to earn money too. As buying energy isn't necessary at all, creating cosmetics is the only way to keep the game running. Also, I don't believe that OOO hasn't been working on anything the last few years: I still expect great things to be released very soon.

"3. Way too much crap is monetized. Seriously, this is a game that is *made* to be monetized with cosmetics and fluff. I mean, there's so much potential there compared to other games like LoL or TF2, why does every little thing have to be nickle-and-dime or spend endless hours grinding? Where are the permanent weapon and trinket slot upgrades?"

Not at all. If they wanted to monetize the game, they could just remove the energy market. The only things that are really pay-exclusive are the cosmetics, and even they can be traded. Buying energy does give you an advantage, but that is logical: else it would be "Here you can buy energy, it costs real money, but you can't do anything useful with it because else the game is monetized". I think SK's economy is great, compared to some, or actually almost all other MMOs.

WHAT!??!?!?!?!?!??!? SHUT DOWN SK?!?!?!? Note how well rated the game is:

Armorgames: #4 out of 81 MMOs
Kongregate: #1 out of 200 MMOs
etc...

So "cut the cord completely" would be stupid to do with a game as great as SK...

Thu, 03/26/2015 - 06:43

#11

Hexzyle

I liked the bit where he

I liked the bit where he thinks an MMO isn't supposed to be a grind.

MMO's are designed to be timesinks. They're designed for the (no longer) niche market of people who have way too much bloody time to spare and want to spend it online playing an only half-decent game with other people who also have way too much time to spare. They're designed for people who have (or soon will not have) no children, no partners (at least, partners who dont also play videogames), and/or few friends (who don't also play videogames)

They're designed for our overfed society that has nothing better to do than to sit infront of a screen to pass the time. MMO's are the videogame equivalant of FaceBook, or Sunday television.
F2P MMO's are no exception. This is so predominent, it's almost fact. This is the genre we're playing. If you don't like it, tough biscuits, because there isn't very much at all that is better in the genre. (There is an unbelievable amount that is worse though. Take a look around, play another MMO, you'll soon see what I'm talking about) MMO's are the hardest game to develop, so only the bigger companies produce them. And I can tell you that the bigger a company is, the less they care about the playerbase and the more they care about the money. This is also so predominant, its pretty much fact.

I like to think of an MMO as a place of socializing, with a game tacked onto the side. To think otherwise would be to overlook the strongest point of an MMO, and thus I might as well just play a Single Player or regular Multiplayer game.

Thu, 03/26/2015 - 07:05

#12

Skepticraven

↓

@Hexzyle

"MMO's are designed to be timesinks. They're designed for the (no longer) niche market of people who have way too much bloody time to spare and want to spend it online playing an only half-decent game with other people who also have way too much time to spare. They're designed for people who have (or soon will not have) no children, no partners (at least, partners who dont also play videogames), and/or few friends (who don't also play videogames)"

I agree that MMOs are timesinks, but I strongly disagree with the remainder of this statement. I know plenty of MMO players that have children, have partners (that usually also play the same MMOs), have friends (whom also play the same MMOs), and actually enjoy playing the games for the unique gameplay [ex: in-game player-controlled markets].

The issue that I believe you are hinting at is the addictive nature of MMOs to gain and keep a large player-base. They need to be addictive to be successful. The way you are phrasing it is not a "the players are enjoying/addicted to it" but rather "they have nothing better to do". MMOs aren't designed for introverts, but I would agree that introverts are more susceptible to addictive habits. A very common F2P model for any game genre is a trade-off between money and time.

Thu, 03/26/2015 - 09:35

#13

Smalltownguy

it's a social game

I agree the main purpose of a MMO is to socialize. I've known people who spent hours in a MMO chatting with friends they've never met in person - who might live thousands of miles away - and only occasionally crew up to actually play the game. I've built friendships of my own by pausing during dungeon runs to chat with crew mates. It's not just a race from one battle to the next.

Successful MMOs know this, and build features into the game to encourage this. They will usually have common areas where people can battle small monsters and meet others battling monsters. They will have safe areas where people can just hang out. They will have boss battles which require forming crews and learning group tactics. The more possibilities for interaction, the longer the players will stay in the game and the more they will return.

Yes, they're time sinks. So is any other game, whether baseball, running, chess, or table tennis. So what?

I strongly disagree that MMOs are comparable to Sunday television. Television (and single-player video games) strongly discourages any interaction with others. If you're interacting with anyone, you're not watching the show.

Thu, 03/26/2015 - 13:40

#14

Fehzor

@Hexzyle

We've been through this before and I don't know why I type these out, because I'm fairly certain that no one cares and that the bulk of you just want me to bugger off and kill myself, but I'll type another out for you-

I don't think that MMOs have to be massive time sink. MMO means massively multiplayer online, and that's a lot of games. Team Fortress 2 has the same market type thing we do, and in fact is linked to our market through the steam market in a way. It has item drops and boxes like we do. It has PvE and PvP and community interaction on servers just like we do. But it isn't just a time sink like Spiral Knights is- you don't forcibly spend time doing monotonous tasks with the attitude "GOTTA GET THAT ITEM". The genre is plagued by the sort of game that you suggest represents all things MMO, but that doesn't mean that Spiral Knights should seek to become like them.

Thu, 03/26/2015 - 20:40

#15

Avihr

Why I don't care anymore.

I'm just going to give you guys who are out there still playing this game a piece of advice:

If you don't like the game the way it is right now, don't play it.

If you're tired of it because it just feels too grindy for you, don't play the game.

If you feel like you've just beaten every single level this game can offer to you for the 573 thousandth time and you're bored of it already, don't play this game.

If you would rather play on the coliseum but you hate it anyways because of lag or because stuff is out of balance and you think that it was poorly made, don't play the game.

If you're expecting some magical update to change all those things you don't like about the game, don't play this game, at least not until some update that could qualify as such happens.

If you're sick of the constant-combo-pocalypse promos of DOOM and you'd rather spend your money on a burrito or something, don't spend money on this game. Buy a burrito instead.

If you want something to change on this game don't make a rant about it on general discussion, use the suggestion forums.

If you still feel like playing this game, you have to accept what it is, and what it has been for quite a long time now, with all it's promos, with all it's costumes and events and all those things that you may or may not like. if you play this game, it is because you enjoy playing what it has to offer right now or else you would be somewhere else (unless you want to make yourself miserable). Don't wait around wasting your time, making up theories, looking for ghosts and illuminati pyramids inside random game files to try convince yourself that some update is going to come soon and make this game what you want it to be.
Just have some respect for your Vog dang self and do something you REALLY enjoy doing instead of logging in and say how much you wish this game to be another game, because it isn't (obviously loollololoolololl).
And yes this has very little to do with the OP, but if you have read the subject you already know why I posted it anyway.

Cya l8r allig8r

Thu, 03/26/2015 - 22:59

#16

Hexzyle

@Skepticraven
The way you are phrasing it is not a "the players are enjoying/addicted to it" but rather "they have nothing better to do". MMOs aren't designed for introverts, but I would agree that introverts are more susceptible to addictive habits

Yes, I agree I did phrase it incorrectly. I have plenty better things to do, which I never get around to doing when I play Spiral Knights. I haven't played any other MMO as seriously, and I hope I never do. Once Spiral Knights finishes up, that's it for me regarding MMO's because now I understand their addictive nature firsthand.

@Smalltownguy
I strongly disagree that MMOs are comparable to Sunday television.

Yeah, I know, bad example. I was just looking for a real-life equivalant to prove my point. Oh! How about keno or the pokies? Those can be social activities.

@Fehzor
because I'm fairly certain that no one cares and that the bulk of you just want me to bugger off and kill myself

Dunno why the blazing spookats you put this sentence in your comment, so I'm gonna list my responses to all the interpreted reasons:
1. Stop putting words in my mouth
2. Stop being such a blatantly obvious sympathy seeker
3. Stop making stupid generalizations about the forum community (or people in general)
4. If you want to be a misanthrope, keep misanthropic comments to yourself.
These responses may or may not be mutually exclusive.

MMO means massively multiplayer online, and that's a lot of games

Uh.... I think you're taking "Massively Multiplayer Online" too literally. "Role Playing Game" doesn't specifically only refer to games in which you RP. Shmups don't always only refer to games in which you are shooting upwards. RTS is a ridiculously ambiguous title which, using your reasoning, you could apply to almost anything because so many games feature the use of strategy in some form of another.

Massively Multiplayer Online refers to a game that has a persistant world, which is affected and changes via the interaction of its players, and can generally support an extremely large number of players on a single persistant, (usually) official server. (or a network of interconnected servers in the case of MMOs sporting 50+ simultaneous players)
TF2 is not a MMO. It's a multiplayer game, it has online capabilities, and a massive number of people play it, but this does not make it a Massively Multiplayer Online game, in the same way that Unreal Tournament is not a MMO, and neither is Portal 2, Counter-Strike, Tribes, Quake, Call of Duty, Halo, or even Battlefield.

@All
Team Fortress 2 is not a time sink in the same way as Spiral Knights because Spiral Knights is plagued by the "levelling system"
This is the choice system for literally 100% of MMOs, and you know why? Because it rewards time spent on the game by arbitrarily boosting your character's abilities in the game. It rewards you for how much you play the game. Not how good you are, no no no. If you've spent 200 hours on a character in an MMORPG, you can wipe the floor with people who have only spent 10 hours on their character, regardless of how terrible you are at games, and how good your opponent is. People love to feel this sort of superiority. (This is also valid in single player RPGs. Encounter a challenge? Just grind an easier spot for 5 hours and the challenge is no longer a challenge anymore.) THIS is why MMO's are so addictive, and why they're so much of a timesink.

I'm not saying this system is bad (well, I am, actually. Sorry) Some people love the grind. I love the grind. Actually, everyone loves the grind. (but for all the wrong reasons, i.e. the feeling of achievement, despite the fact that you didn't really do anything that every other player will eventually do once they've also spent 1000 hours in the game) I'm just trying to outline why it's such a silly, overabused system that could be replaced by a better mechanic: i.e. games that actually do more to reward skill.

That being said, Spiral Knights (along with one other mention, Mount&Blade) have actually done very well reducing the impact of this arbitrary difference in power based on time sunk into the game. Skill plays an enormous role, and that's why the ARPG genre is probably the strongest blend of multiple main genres.

Sat, 03/28/2015 - 13:16

#17

Fangel

Amen there Aviri

I personally like the game as it is now... Then again I live in the moment quite a bit so it's nothing new to me to enjoy a game for what it is right now. It's not bad to give suggestions about how you think it could be improved, however it isn't productive or healthy to expect Spiral Knights to be a game that it isn't. I get sorta upset when people try to compare TF2's PvP to this game's PvP because they're completely different. If you want to play TF2 go do that - it's free after all. You can use TF2 to create a parallel to show your thought process (eg. "have guardian shields shoot health beams that track players like the TF2 medic medigun does"), but don't go about spouting how TF2 is obvs superior and that SK needs to become TF2 because they are different games. If every game was TF2, then no game would be TF2.

And over to Hexzyle's @Everyone thingy, lots of people seem to take a lot of words a little too literally. When you say "MMO", it reads out to "Massively Multiplayer Online". People then come to the conclusion that MMO means multiplayer with a large playerbase, however MMOs usually are connecting all players together in one world. In order to combat lag we get multiple servers/instances, but that doesn't stop it from being an MMO. TF2 isn't necessarily an MMO by my own definition as there is no real overall big world or "social zones". You play TF2 to fight each other or robots, and some people go on trade servers and stuff to socialize (but honestly I really don't see any appeal in that).

Sat, 03/28/2015 - 14:20

#18

Fehzor

@Hexzyle

"Massively Multiplayer Online refers to a game that has a persistant world, which is affected and changes via the interaction of its players, and can generally support an extremely large number of players on a single persistant, (usually) official server. (or a network of interconnected servers in the case of MMOs sporting 50+ simultaneous players)"

So Spiral Knights isn't an MMO, because it is not directly affected or changed by the interaction of its players. Nor does it support an extremely large number of players in any meaningful way gameplay wise. I'd count lockdown as utilizing a large numbers of players in a meaningful way, but TF2 is supposedly not an MMO, and utilizes more players in the same way.

I fail to see a way in which Spiral Knights is an MMO but team fortress isn't. Both have massive markets, both have similar gameplay to an extent- TF2's capture point mode and Spiral Knight's lockdown, TF2's Mann vs Machine and Spiral Knight's clockworks, both even have similar role playing elements- you choose a character that has been defined for you and given abilities outside of your control and roll with it. You never really sit down and say "I am the spy, and the spy would do X, Y or Z.." but then you never really act like the knight or make knightly decisions either outside of a few basic dialogue areas.

The big difference, is that in Spiral Knights you have the time investment business that buffs your character very slowly (as you said), and that in TF2 you don't have to go through that gauntlet. If that's the big definition of "MMO", then perhaps Spiral Knights should strive to be one of whatever TF2 is, other than first person.

Sat, 03/28/2015 - 21:02

#19

Hexzyle

You're right when you say

You're right when you say Spiral Knights doesn't have a persistant overworld (Haven) players can alter like most MMOs, but it does do this in an instantized manner, much akin to a Raid. The transition between different instances and the Haven Overworld is almost seamless and you can join your online friends at any time. The Clan + Clanhall feature doesn't define an MMO/RPG, but it is a common component. The market is integrated into the game. The core game revolves around logging in to a overworld with a large number of people, and then branching off with a couple of those people (often of your choosing, and the features of the game make it extremely easy to do so) and then playing through instantized levels, returning to the persistant overworld when you are done.

TF2 at its core though is a Multiplayer Class-Based Arena FPS. Servers must be hosted by the playerbase, so the game by the definition of the word is not persistantly online. Valve does host servers, but this is not anywhere close to mandatory for the game's continued existance. There is a global inventory for the player to transfer between servers, but there is no socializing cross-server, no in-game market (except for trade servers specifically set up by players for this purpose) and definitely no persistent Overworld players can chill out in and socialize.
Steam does provide a lot of these features, (although they are segregated from the game and nowhere near as intuitive as an MMO's integrated ones) but that is because it is a Social Networking Service, with its games cunningly attached onto it. Does this mean that Steam's features should be assumed to be Steam's games' features? I don't think so, but it probably is debateable.

(Opinion) Steam has the massive market, not TF2. The market just happens to be for things usable in TF2, but they aren't marketable in-game. Also, the market may be large because of the playerbase, but it's not global because of the coding. Basically what it seems you're trying to say that a game's genre is defined by how many people play it. I believe that a game's genre, specifically the seperation between Multiplayer, Multiplayer Online, and Massively Multiplayer Online is dependant on how the gaming is coded and what it can support. "Dead MMOs" therefore can and do exist. As I mentioned before, if lots of people Role Play in a game, does not make it a Role-Playing Game, as it hasn't been designed as one. Certainly, the community can declare that they play an RPG within the game, but lots of people stuff hot jam into dough and sprinkle it with sugar and it diesn't make all dough a confectionary.

Capture Point is a competitive game mode. It has nothing to do with the genre of the game. Lots of games, regardless of genre have a CTF gamemode too But its primarily (like, 98%) a Shooter thing, so this isn't even a point in the favor of "TF2 is an MMO", its a point for "SK is a competitive shooter".
The RPG-esque stats in MvM does not make TF2 an MMO. It makes it an RPG. Actually not really because as soon as you leave the server, you are robbed of your stats. The only genres that do that are Permadeath Roguelikes, MOBAs, and Tower Defence games. Only the latter two seem to fit, (Tower Defense literally perfectly) only the former two are RPG, and none of them are explicitly MMO.

The "big difference" you say isn't a property of MMOs, it's a property of RPGs. And yeah, Spiral Knights SHOULD aspire to be like TF2, because despite what a lot of people complain about, TF2 has done a LOT of things right. (i.e. RPG elements and progression done through sidegrading rather than upgrading a.k.a "playtime-to-win" or "pay-to-win)

Sorry for any blatant mistakes, my phone LOVES to destroy sections of my comments by inserting autocorrected words in completely random places once the text entry box exceeds a certain number of characters (which is like, 300)

Search

Why I don't play this any more