Does Mastery = Balance?
Posted 13 February 2017 - 08:26 PM
"Because you know so much about balance mister 70 hours."
And your Mastery means a particular game is balanced?
I presented this question to both the opposer and myself. It's one I've pondered a bit on. So I decided to bring it up here.
If someone can put in 500+ hours and master the game, does that make the game balanced because the Master says so?
- fbrrrs likes this
I swear I'm not half as angry as I seem to be.
Please give me one star to help cure the new form of cancer called ResolutionBlaze
Check out Unlucky 7, rebooted after three long years of silence! http://store.steampo...com/app/579120/
Posted 13 February 2017 - 08:43 PM
Depends, in a competitive game it should be balanced for the most part to cater to the highest levels of play. Masters of a game tend to pick out strats that are overtuned and spot things that stick out as OP. This makes mastery INCREDIBLY valuable in these types of games because they are built to be played with skill over situation and a FINE degree of balance.
In non competitive games it matters much less, you just need the balance to be "Good Enough" that nothing is particularly broken. So instead of looking at what the masters can do look at what the general population picks up on and starts to exploit. Shaking up the game in this way makes it so OP strats cant settle and the meta shifts around keeping the game fresh and inventive. This type of balancing affects the majority over the top uber skilled players.
So does a 70 hour person know less about the nature of balance in a game than a person with 500? Almost definitely, but that doesn't mean that a new player cant spot a GLARINGLY obvious problem.
"He is Jason, the man who came back from hell with the strength of 1,000 retards." - Random Redditor
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users