I'm hearing a lot of assumptions as to the personality of players and that being the problem. I argue we all have similar wants and desires and methods to get what we want in this game. The problem I see is one of basic human nature and the incentive the game creates. We are not bad people, we are doing what works best for our own self interest. Just because a society needs laws to keep people in check doesn't mean it's broken. Distribution rules keep things fair and equitable and keep us on a level playing field. Without rules, even though all players are working and contributing equally, some people playing will find themselves really enjoying the game where others will find themselves harboring resentment.

The problem is this game is not the real world. In the real world we would need to cooperate to survive. Deals, agreements and alliances get worked out. In a game world if I don't find it "enjoyable" I simply stop playing.

To give some perspective. In my game I'm playing with a buddy I've known for 10 years. We still enjoy playing in other RPG groups together without problems. In this game though, we have problems. Even though we started the game together and Worked together, somehow we have almost a 1.5 level gap between us. I'm level 3, he is level 4. He also loots and sells everything first while I'm lucky to beg for broken hand me downs. Lol
The game has evolved for us to play separately instead of co op. Which is not the co op game I was interested in.

Decide what is best From a game design perspective trying to develop what is most enjoyable to most players for your game to sell.

A game where players Co op but can lie, cheat and steal and fight each other gain all the loot and xp while the others get nothing is gonna end badly.

This game is like a an interesting sociological experiment testing human behavior. It's Co op without much incentive to Co op. Just like society without laws the group will fall apart.

I said at the beginning, if you think most gamers work in harmony, are kind, unselfish, philanthropists who play fair and enjoy giving to charity, then sure, everything should be just fine in your game world. This game's loot distribution doesn't need any changes. Those who are not decent shouldn't be playing games with you right? So design a game to sell to this "good" percentage of people. I'm gonna argue it's 5% lol.

But if you are like me and know how most of us are really gonna behave I'd like to see assigned loot.

Haha I like this discussion.

Side note: I think If loot was assigned the value could simply be divided by number of players to keep balance in the economy. Example: instead of player A finding 10 gold and the other nothing, both find 1-5 gold. And items can be found less often by individuals but the same total as is now for the group. Example: Instead of a crate having a 20% chance of magic armor only one player takes, each player gets a 5% chance.

Last edited by Boathouse; 13/12/16 05:30 PM.