Starhawk Rank: Time Played or Skill?

By
Sharp Dagger
– September 20, 2011

Dylan Jobe on twitter made the following statement: “Typically, a player’s rank in video games is an indicator of time-played rather than skill. Our goal for #Starhawk is to measure both.”

This sounds great.  I have for a long time said that both philosophies of time played and skill were valid understandable philosophies.  It’s just a matter of what the developer wants.  Does the developer want all his players to feel a sense of completion by reaching the final rank or should the final rank be a measure of excellence and mastery?

My only issue with the concept of “both” for rank advancement is related to the skill/perk system.  I have been a supporter of having skills/perks in Starhawk.  When I debate people, they often tell me how it is not fair that a new player doesn’t have the skills that a veteran player has.  My argument is that it is fair.  Put in your time like he/she did and eventually you will have access to all the skills.  Simple enough right?  Well…this all changes if they decide they want to keep someone from ranking up because he/she is not at a required skill level.  At that point, if perks are associated, you will be making it so there are some gifted people who will have access to some skills/perks that many will never have access to.  This is a bad scenario.

 The solution?  Make it so that most people (virtually all) can obtain a particular rank  with time played and make the skills/perks end at that level. For the remaining levels that will be limited by player skill, make all the rewards cosmetic customizations only.  This way the end ranks can mean something yet everyone in the game will (eventually) have access to all skills/perks.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,