Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


#ActualSuperVGA

Posted 27 November 2012 - 01:38 PM

I believe there is a sweet spot for "social" in games.
(Disclaimer: I don't know squat about psychology)
Like in real life, a densely populated area tends to have people ignoring oneanother,
while being just two persons in an otherwise deserted lands are more likely to connect.

Of course the more challenging the environment (as in urban vs. wilderness), the more need people will see to team up.
I understand your "be more singleplayer" idea, although I think it's a balancing issue.

#2SuperVGA

Posted 27 November 2012 - 01:37 PM

I believe there is a sweet spot for "social" in games.
(Disclaimer: I don't know squat about psychology)
Like in real life, a densely populated urban area tends to have people ignoring oneanother,
while being just two persons in otherwise deserted lands are more likely to connect.

Of course the more challenging the environment, the more need people will see to team up.
I understand your "be more singleplayer" idea, although I think it's a balancing issue.

#1SuperVGA

Posted 27 November 2012 - 01:36 PM

I believe there id a sweet spot for "social" in games.
(Disclaimer: I don't know squat about psychology)
Like in real life, a densely populated urban area tends to have people ignoring oneanother,
while being just two persons in otherwise deserted lands are more likely to connect.

Of course the more challenging the environment, the more need people will see to team up.
I understand your "be more singleplayer" idea, although I think it's a balancing issue.

PARTNERS