After the first few tumultuous days, things are beginning to calm down a bit (thank God) regarding the recent halo controversy in Team Fortress 2. Accusations of "cheaters" and "hackers" are slowly but surely disappearing, as are counter-accusations of "smug, self-righteous bastards." Given the fallout of this latest development (following months of "hat-envy"), I pose a question to the fine folks at The Escapist:
Was the decision to implement hats so soon premature?
In their now-infamous September 2 blog post, Valve mentions that they are attempting to address the much-maligned random drop system of hats. They talk about experimenting with alternate secondary mechanics like trading or crafting duplicate items to create new ones, ideas they've mentioned before in the past. This begs the question: would it have been better to delay the initial launch of hats if it meant implementing a trading/crafting system from day one?
Gamers are notorious completionists. Many of us try to get every achievement, every epic mount, every alternate ending, etc. The major difference between those previous examples and the current hat system is that there's absolutely nothing the player can do to influence his or her likelihood of getting a hat other than playing/idling for what can be obscenely long periods of time. Even then, there is still no guarantee of getting a hat due to the fact that it's random. Even in "grind-heavy" games like World of Warcraft, there's still a sense of progression as you amass enough money to get that coveted axe at the auction house, or gain a high enough level to get that sweet flying mount. In TF2, however, there is seemingly no rhyme or reason for the hats. Some people who bought the game on day one still have no hats, yet some newcomers have gotten lucky with three hat drops in two days. This has helped foster resentment amongst the community, which only harms the game's continued longevity.
One may argue (and rightfully so) that it shouldn't matter. After all, the hats do not change core gameplay whatsoever. However, it has become undeniably clear that hats have become a status symbol of sorts amongst players. In this day and age of graphics rivalling or surpassing special effects in modern movies, there is much emphasis on visuals. Valve must share some responsibility in this, as they themselves referred to hats as status symbols ( http://www.teamfortress.com/classless/day01.php ) and once referred to the hatless as "poor and Irish." Granted these were made in jest, but by drawing so much attention to it, Valve has inadvertently made it an issue.
In my personal opinion, the hat system would have been more readily accepted if a trading/crafting system of sorts had been there from the start. It would have given players something to aim for, be it finding the right trade, or getting the right duplicates to craft the right hat. Anyone familiar with Valve knows how long it normally takes them to make a game and are used to delays (since it usually results in a fine-tuned, well-implemented game). Should the developers have utilized some of their famous "Valve time" and gone the extra mile on hats before releasing it to the public?
Apologies if this has been discussed before.
Was the decision to implement hats so soon premature?
In their now-infamous September 2 blog post, Valve mentions that they are attempting to address the much-maligned random drop system of hats. They talk about experimenting with alternate secondary mechanics like trading or crafting duplicate items to create new ones, ideas they've mentioned before in the past. This begs the question: would it have been better to delay the initial launch of hats if it meant implementing a trading/crafting system from day one?
Gamers are notorious completionists. Many of us try to get every achievement, every epic mount, every alternate ending, etc. The major difference between those previous examples and the current hat system is that there's absolutely nothing the player can do to influence his or her likelihood of getting a hat other than playing/idling for what can be obscenely long periods of time. Even then, there is still no guarantee of getting a hat due to the fact that it's random. Even in "grind-heavy" games like World of Warcraft, there's still a sense of progression as you amass enough money to get that coveted axe at the auction house, or gain a high enough level to get that sweet flying mount. In TF2, however, there is seemingly no rhyme or reason for the hats. Some people who bought the game on day one still have no hats, yet some newcomers have gotten lucky with three hat drops in two days. This has helped foster resentment amongst the community, which only harms the game's continued longevity.
One may argue (and rightfully so) that it shouldn't matter. After all, the hats do not change core gameplay whatsoever. However, it has become undeniably clear that hats have become a status symbol of sorts amongst players. In this day and age of graphics rivalling or surpassing special effects in modern movies, there is much emphasis on visuals. Valve must share some responsibility in this, as they themselves referred to hats as status symbols ( http://www.teamfortress.com/classless/day01.php ) and once referred to the hatless as "poor and Irish." Granted these were made in jest, but by drawing so much attention to it, Valve has inadvertently made it an issue.
In my personal opinion, the hat system would have been more readily accepted if a trading/crafting system of sorts had been there from the start. It would have given players something to aim for, be it finding the right trade, or getting the right duplicates to craft the right hat. Anyone familiar with Valve knows how long it normally takes them to make a game and are used to delays (since it usually results in a fine-tuned, well-implemented game). Should the developers have utilized some of their famous "Valve time" and gone the extra mile on hats before releasing it to the public?
Apologies if this has been discussed before.
