Is grinding bad/outdated design?

[BrawlMan]

As with most things a well designed game can pull off grinding. A poorly designed one can't. If you make side activities varied and upgrades that feel like an edge rather than just stat points that you feel too weak without, then grinding is fine.

Saints Row for example has a ton of similar side missions that could be considered "grinding" complete with experience point levels and unshockable abilities, but the grinding never seems dull, because it mixes it up and rewards you more heavily for doing things you haven't done or getting gold medals. Plus if you want to slam through the game you can do it, you just won't have the edge. Plus one look at the available upgrades and you'll see something that will make you go "I WANT TO HAVE THAT"

Yeah no, I hated grinding in Saints Row. At the very least, the first game. By the 5th hour in I was bored out of my motherfucking mind. Saints Row 2 did it better (yet still annoying), but I felt no need to play III or IV, because I have grown tired of sandbox.

Ah yeah I've never played the first one. Was mostly talking about 3 and 4 but I don't remember it annoying me in 2.

SR 2 elevated the grinding a bit, but it was still frustrating that I could not unlock a mission, weapons, or clothing, because I did not have this much "X" amount of respect to do so. It's obvious padding and does not make the game any better.

 

[CaitSeith]

Mu, that question is too generalized. In some cases it is, in others it isn't. It depends more in how the developers implement grinding than the grinding itself.

 

[DoPo]

Point-Buy

Well, question on that. Isn't point-buy similar in that your actions earn you points to buy your enhancements, as opposed to experience granting effectively the same?

Erm...yes. To an extent. In fact, often point buy does use XP as the "advancement currency". It doesn't really matter what it's called though, since the effect is that you spend to gain . Contrast with "traditional" levelling where you collect (pretty much universally called XP) which automatically gives you another level of power. The mechanics of what a "level" does by itself vary between games, but usually you get a natural boost in few core statistics - frequently, one or more of: health pool, defence, offence, fuel capacity (most often "mana"). In addition, a level would often also give your characters some points that can be distributed among primary/secondary abilities. Regularly, levels go hand in hand with classes - those, in turn, serve to narrow and focus the aptitudes your character can have, e.g., a warrior would be good with hitting enemies repeatedly and being hit, a wizard would be good at using spells, a ranger would be able to shoot from afar, etc.

So, with levelling up, there is a lot of constraints on how to develop your character. In most cases, a class can have a very big say on how your character is allowed to develop - a warrior is not going to be slinging fireballs left and right, a wizard is not going to naturally laugh off blows that pulverize normal people, rangers aren't going to be charming crowds with their music. Where hybrid classes exist, they tend to be "jack of two trades, pretty good at both, but not the best".

Point buy, on the other hand, implies more freedom in the process of advancement. You still get XP (or replacement) with which to get more skills but most often there is no "natural boost" to core stats like levelling tends to do. In addition, while classes could exist, there is still less restriction and focus on how a character is allowed to advance.

You could have a system which is point buy but is pretty close to normal levelling. In Fable, for example, you would be killing dudes and doing quests and be getting XP from them the same as many an other game only difference being you don't automatically get more powerful but have to spend the XP afterwards. However, I was suggesting, a quest-based reward only, where enemies don't grant you XP, only missions do. This way you get additional freedom in pick your pace - you can murder everybody in the mission or rush to the end to get the reward or mix them up. You can, furthermore, go and kill dudes for enjoyment, if you so wish, as opposed to having to do it because you need that 100 XP to get to the next level.

 

[Evonisia]

Yeah no, I hated grinding in Saints Row. At the very least, the first game. By the 5th hour in I was bored out of my motherfucking mind. Saints Row 2 did it better (yet still annoying), but I felt no need to play III or IV, because I have grown tired of sandbox.

For what it's worth as I know the fact they're sandbox games put you off, The Third and IV are a lot less grindy. The modes are far more optional than they were in the first two games because they're not needed to do the missions, and the modes themselves usually aren't needed for some game-breaking reward like say the Kobra from "Saints Row 2".

Respect basically got turned into a currency for ability unlocks, increased health and what not.

 

[FalloutJack]

Constrained VS Controlled

Ah, so it's not so much a problem with the idea of going out and beating the crap out of enemies and doing missions, so much as how the evolution of power in your character goes, right? Okay, I see where you're going with this. Like, you have Persona and Final Fantasy which have a pretty standard grind (although some FF games have items unlocking new powers that you can master, say, and FFX's sphere system is more point-buy to me), but then you have actual D&D games where you buy your skills and determine specifically what got stronger, how much, and at what time. I can understand that. I thought the issue was with the actual going out and killing stuff part, which I'm rather good at.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Its only grinding if it isn't fun. A slight variation of the idea that games - fun = work.

I call it grinding even though I enjoy it. What else would you call it?

 

[IamLEAM1983]

"Tedious" is subjective, as is "grinding".

I agree. Some people will really fall for the expected Pavlovian responses - see Diablo players - and the general sense that grinding is part of the endless process of becoming more powerful or proficient. To some really skillful SoulsBorne players, there isn't much of anything like extinguishing monster spawns in an area, or at the very least, knowing that your efforts will make sure you're properly equipped for whatever true challenge lies ahead. What comes *after* the grind is what motivates them.

In my case, though? Grinding is a hassle. I prefer games that exponentially unpack their toolsets and that remain entirely beatable even if you ignore side quests or random brigands or baddies to execute.

Considering, Skyrim and The Witcher III have the same base problem, as far as I'm concerned. The sheer wealth of available questlines makes it seem like over-levelling is the only real way to play.

 

[Mister K]

As other have said, it depends on how it's implemented.

There are (imo) 2 ways that developers can take to make grinding OK-ish: either make it fun/engaging, or mask the dullness well enough so that people wouldn't notice it.

I am not sure what can be counted as an example of the former, but I'll go with Demons' Souls: my favourite way to grind was was equiping Stormruler and going to the last zone of Stormpriests area.

Did you hide in that crumbled building with no roof? I gained many a level from that spot!

Indeed I did. While equipped with Ring of Avarice. And the fact that you were cutting giant giant flying stingrays with wves of air made grinding a lot less tedious.

 

[FPLOON]

Grinding sucks no matter how much variety (or lack there of) is included with it... With that said, I fucking love grinding to the point that I'm fine with just grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... Grinding it... GRINDING IT!!

*ahem* Other than that, grinding, as a concept, is so easy to fuck up that any trochievements around grinding should just go fuck themselves for even being associated with fucked up grinding to begin with... In other words, grind responsibly, developers!

 

[Arnoxthe1]

It should be very optional. If it's any sort of mandatory, that's very bad.

 

[G00N3R7883]

Depends what you're grinding for.

If you're grinding XP because your character is too weak to beat an enemy/boss in an RPG ... then yes its bad, the game difficulty/level up curve is unbalanced. (Darkest Dungeon is an example of a game that gets this horribly wrong. The basic gameplay is fun to begin with, but after 50+ hours of grinding the same dungeons over and over and over I still wasn't strong enough to beat the level 5 bosses, and I lost interest in the game).

If you're grinding for currency in a F2P game so you can buy stuff for free ... depends how long you have to grind for. The developers control the economy so the danger is they make the grind so long and boring to encourage the player to just say "screw it, I'll just pay real money for the thing" (MechWarrior Online is a game that is definately guilty of this, forcing you to level up 3 different variants of the same mech to unlock the top tier skills, even if you only intend to play 1 variant long term - but you could buy XP boosts to speed up the process).

 

[List]

Depends on how good/bad the grinding is made to be.

Good example of grinding I find acceptable/fun I can name at the top of my head is Monster Hunter and Warframe maybe even Diablo 3. Bad Grinding experiences I usually come across with is mainly on MMO's these days, especially f2ps.

 

[Saelune]

Its only grinding if it isn't fun. A slight variation of the idea that games - fun = work.

I call it grinding even though I enjoy it. What else would you call it?

Playing the game.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Its only grinding if it isn't fun. A slight variation of the idea that games - fun = work.

I call it grinding even though I enjoy it. What else would you call it?

Playing the game.

Going back and forth for hours to gain levels is grinding, whether you enjoy it or not. I enjoy it but it is what it is.

 

[Saelune]

Its only grinding if it isn't fun. A slight variation of the idea that games - fun = work.

I call it grinding even though I enjoy it. What else would you call it?

Playing the game.

Going back and forth for hours to gain levels is grinding, whether you enjoy it or not. I enjoy it but it is what it is.

I don't consider playing Diablo grinding, for example. Repetition isn't automatically tedious.

 

[mad825]

I do find that grinding is just bad design. It's an unbalanced result between progressiveness and difficulty. You cannot make a enjoyable game when you progress too quickly and easily nor can you make an enjoyable game when progresses too slow with difficulty, people would normally just get bored with it.

How the balanced between the two is maintained would vary on the mechanics that you use and how long you want the game to be.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Its only grinding if it isn't fun. A slight variation of the idea that games - fun = work.

I call it grinding even though I enjoy it. What else would you call it?

Playing the game.

Going back and forth for hours to gain levels is grinding, whether you enjoy it or not. I enjoy it but it is what it is.

I don't consider playing Diablo grinding, for example. Repetition isn't automatically tedious.

Again, tedium isn't the defining factor for grinding, it's repetition for stat/money building.

 

[WeepingAngels]

I do find that grinding is just bad design. It's an unbalanced result between progressiveness and difficulty. You cannot make a enjoyable game when you progress too quickly and easily nor can you make an enjoyable game when progresses too slow with difficulty, people would normally just get bored with it.

How the balanced between the two is maintained would vary on the mechanics that you use and how long you want the game to be.

Forced grinding is bad design. Games where grinding is not allowed are also not good design. Grinding should be a difficulty mechanism, the more you do it the easier the game gets but it isn't as free as a slider, it costs you time. You should be able to use strategy to win without grinding but some people, like me, love feeling overpowered and enjoy the process of getting that way. In fact, it's why I play JRPG's, for the growth. It certainly isn't for the 'kids save the world with the power of friendship' stories. Battle systems that you can truly exploit are fun, like Final Fantasy 8.

 

[Odbarc]

Grinding can be two things;

It can be good if your doing something fun and enjoy what your doing or if you want to end up with more power than you need to continue.
But in some games like MMOs, it feels more like grind to proceed. It halts your progress and forces time out of you before you go to the next spot. Especially when MMOs were mostly pay-to-play, causing you to give up time makes you pay more between times you get to new areas.

Good grind would be Baal Runs in Diablo 2 where your levels skyrocket from 30 to 50 in an hour or less instead of in 10.
You could easily go to the next difficulty at 30 and play but doing it at feels better.