Is grinding bad/outdated design?

[hanselthecaretaker]

Or can it be acceptable if the gameplay itself is satisfying?

I think this can be the case if it's varied enough. I don't mind it in games like Souls or even MGSV, simply because the tactics and variety of options at your disposal along with rewards for your efforts keep it from really feeling monotonous.

Of course this is subjective and depends on gaming tastes, but even with purely story-driven cinematic games, there will always be some form of tedious, repetitive play. The deciding factor is if it's still fun to the user.

 

[ellixer2407]

If the grinding is varied enough I think it's fine (like going through a variety of activities in a sandbox game or something). If grinding is a general necessity then I personally think it would be detrimental to my enjoyment as it kills the pacing. I think it's sort of alright in Souls because it's not a necessity if you manage your souls well. Grinding there is just a way to make fights easier or pick yourself back up if you've been losing too much souls to keep up. Grinding for 100% completion is also fine I think, but again I don't think the average player should have to grind for long period just to beat the game.

 

[Saelune]

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

 

[MysticSlayer]

Even in games that have a combat system that feels good (e.g. Dark Souls), I would say that grinding gets tiring. There's very little a game designer can do to keep things fresh, and once you keep doing the same thing over and over again, it just turns into a chore. Consider some RPGs have done a decent job of avoiding grinding, I don't think there's much excuse for it anymore.

 

[nomotog_v1legacy]

Yes, but only by definition. Having repeating content that is fun and varied isn't really grinding. It's fun varied content. Grinding is more when you suffer bad or repetitive content in order to reach good content.

Lots of games can get good mileage out of the same content. Like in DD I loved fighting so much that I didn't mind killing the same thing over and over. MG5 gets a ton of mileage out of their complex stealth system and huge weapon verity. (It's actually impressive when you think about it. Normally replaying a stealth level is less fun.)

 

[FalloutJack]

The level grind is not bad, especially when you consider there hasn't really been a good alternative, at least none that I'm aware of. I don't mind doing it, really. I laugh at how I'm molding my soldiers of hell on the battlefield into perfect killing machines.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

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"

 

[Elvis Starburst]

Only if done poorly. Some may argue the Monster Hunter format of grinding is bad. I think it's fun because the monster's AI move and behave in ways that keeps repeated hunts from getting too stale. MMOs I think have garbage grinding, and plenty of RPGs fall flat due to their grinding and leveling systems

 

[MHR]

Grinding is good. It's a tool to extend the life of content. Without grinding, many games quickly run out of content.

Do a dungeon in an MMO once? It's complete, you have all the gear, there's no reason to go back. Without any rewards, probably no one will go back. There are many dead dungeons that people have out-leveled or out-geared that nobody plays.

You play a campaign shooter and lets say it lasts 7 hours. There aren't even any achievements to grind. Statistically speaking, people have a high chance of never playing that game again, or only once. Shooters nowadays have a multiplayer feature to keep it relevant, even if it sucks. They have leveling XP systems to keep people hooked on the multiplayer otherwise many players would play a handful of matches, find out that they either suck or won, and never play again. Grinding for unlocks gives some people something to do.

Even in objectively "good" multiplayer games like DOTA or Overwatch, there's XP or ELO or other rewards to grind. Some people hate that, but these games have it because it retains many players and loses virtually none. People get satisfaction out of it, and that's what games are all about, so yes, grinding is good.

 

[Morti]

It's the same as it always has been: a niche appeal. The only thing that's changed is that (in my opinion) the number of "gamers" overall has increased drastically over the years, but not the number who are into grinding since most of those who liked that, have always been gamers.

 

[MHR]

The only thing that's changed is that (in my opinion) the number of "gamers" overall has increased drastically over the years, but not the number who are into grinding since most of those who liked that, have always been gamers.

Not really. Lots of the new gamers are being thrown into the grind. Lots of casuals start with MMO's and that's ground-zero for the grind. Lots of mobile gamers too, especially women are joining in, and mobile games are a cesspool of low-content gimmick games and grindy madness. There's more grind to be found in a Free-to-play mobile game or any low-content app trying to stretch its play time with grind than most other legit games.

 

[Morti]

The only thing that's changed is that (in my opinion) the number of "gamers" overall has increased drastically over the years, but not the number who are into grinding since most of those who liked that, have always been gamers.

Not really. Lots of the new gamers are being thrown into the grind. Lots of casuals start with MMO's and that's ground-zero for the grind. Lots of mobile gamers too, especially women are joining in, and mobile games are a cesspool of low-content gimmick games and grindy madness. There's more grind to be found in a Free-to-play mobile game or any low-content app trying to stretch its play time with grind than most other legit games.

Different kind of grind though. Sure, it may take days to save up enough "tockens" to build something, but that's over little 15min sessions because of the inevitable "energy" mechanic that prevents you playing. F2P grind is different from "stand here and kill rabbits for 20hrs" MMO grind.

 

[Gray-Philosophy]

If it turns into a repetitive slog, which is necessary to progress in the game, then it's a bad thing I think.

Best example I can think of is something like Experience Grind.
You gotta level up to progress, but there are no activities available. No quests to further the story and no smaller tasks to add variety, so you're stuck killing enemies over and over again until you level up. Maybe even the same type of enemy, in the same location. This is bad.

 

[Rangaman]

If a game (that is not an MMO) forces you to go back and kill as many enemies as possible so you can progress, that is bad game design.

 

[Casual Shinji]

You probably shouldn't base an entire game around it, but if it's just an optional thing for you to beef up your character should you want to, then it's fine.

Making a game's (story) completion depended on it though is not a good idea.

 

[Amir Kondori]

99% of the time yes, grinding is a broken, outdated mechanic that should be left behind in the dustbin of video game history. That being said when the meat of the game is in the combat, i.e. that is where the most engaging and rewarding mechanics are, and it is tied together with a progression system, than grinding is OK.

King's Bounty would be an example of that, the meat of the games is the battles, and you primarily get experience from the battles. If you removed the battles there wouldn't really be a reason to play the game.

 

[Headsprouter]

Runescape is still doing very well, the Old School version doing better than the new. Grinding has its appeal.
It can't simply be removed either if you based the game around it, those who went to the trouble will feel bitter afterwards.

That said, I'd gladly see IVs removed from Pokemon to minimise grinding. EVs and Natures are where you put can put the customisation and individuality in. And grinding for a shiny is okay because it's totally cosmetic and keeps the things restricted to those who are lucky or are willing to put the work in.

(Not to mention, people will have less reason to gen Pokemon using 3rd party software/hardware)

Grinding should be a choice, not an entry fee. But if you like it, you like it.

 

[Dalisclock]

If you need to grind in order to survive until the next town or even have any chance in hell at beating the next boss, then I'd say no, it's not a good thing.

If you need to grind cash just because there's a required moneysink to progress, then hell no.

OTOH, if you're grinding to unlock possibilities and options in your play style and/or gear to make the game more interesting or the fights coming up a little easier, then I'm okay with it.

But I'd prefer that I be able to progress at a reasonable pace through a game, not have to spend 5 hours in each area leveling everyone up just to survive the boss battle.

Then again, I spent a couple hours grinding humanity, Titianite and souls in Dark Souls this weekend so I'd be better prepared for the infamous Tons O'Fun and Hello Kitty fight. Most of the game I didn't need to bother with that, because just killing things to survive gave me more then enough souls to raise levels or upgrade equipment and there were certain bosses/mini-bosses that most of the time I just needed to figure out the trick to beating them.

 

[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.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

Good answers. Another couple things to me that could be as annoying as needing to grind for basic progress is fetching, ei collect X number of something or do a task X amount of times before so and so will help you.

The second is unskippable cutscenes or dialog before being able to start playing missions or levels that need a great number of attempts.