No it isn't just that. It also is about that equipment working better or having their stats boosted which is what perks do.
If I choose to a perk in Fallout when I level up and that perk buffs stats in one category instead of another, that doesn't somehow make that progression horizontal instead of vertical.
...kinda like Stopping Power, which increases bullet damage by 40%. >.>
You are arguing that we can't call that vertical progression because somehow we must just imagine the unlocking of the higher level perk doesn't count as your character progressing? What?!
It has nothing to do with whether your buff is permanent or not. The question is: Can I unlock gameplay options without stat buffs being involved, so as to not unlock buffs to make you perform better but instead to unlock alternative ways to play the game? If so, that is an example of horizontal progression. If there is a stats buff, that constitutes your equipment becoming more powerful and as such, is vertical progression.
Here is what your link says from earlier, just so you can stop pretending that I'm talking out of my ass:
"Vertical progression places an emphasis in strengthening the equipment at your disposal rather than applying the equipment differently or using alternative gear or abilities to succeed at various scenarios."
Perks in CoD4 strengthen the equipment at your disposal instead of giving you more equipment across the board to choose from.
Thing like:
- Increases bullet damage by 40%
- Reduces incoming damage by 25%
- Increases explosives damage by 25%
- Halves reloading time
- Increases rate of fire by 33%
- Gives the player extra starting ammo for their primary and secondary weapons
- Foot steps are 75% more silent
- Extra bullet damage when shooting through walls
- Doubles the player's sprinting time
- Increases hipfiring accuracy
...are all things that are unlocked which buff stats for the character.
If you ulocked a different class with a totally different loadout, for example, THAT would be horizontal progression as you are now positioned with different tools to attack challenges differently. When you just talk about unlocking a new perk, you aren't applying the same gun differently somehow. You aren't using it in some novel way to solve some problem creatively. You are simply taking that gun and making its stats better. Just because you have choices for which vertical path upwards ya wanna take doesn't make that decision itself 'horizontal progression'. The progression in SoT includes unlocking new voyages that your crew can vote on, earning gold to buy gear/cosmetics/weapons, and outfitting your ship. These are all horizontal progression.
Also fwiw, I'm not saying CoD doesn't have some horizontal progression. My point about progression is that Rodelero seems to think SoT has none, when in reality it has horizontal progression. He has argued that unlocking cosmetics is not progression at all, even though those cosmetics can alter the strategies of the person unlocking them as well as others on the server, so they absolutely change how ppl play the game. He may not like their decision to go that route, but they did so for very well defined reasons that are informed and make sense in service of their design goals. Maybe you guys don't agree with their design goals, but there are methods behind what they are doing here. If there weren't, there is no way the game would be as well received as it has been pre-release. The proof is in the pudding.
I care not what your purported experience is, nor his. If your arguments are misinformed or don't make sense, that doesn't somehow change just because someone says they have some experience doing XYZ. Notice that I'm not claiming I'm right just *because* RARE says so. I'm explaining why you are wrong based on actual points and arguments that have a basis in reality independent of my experience, yours, or someone else's. In fact, above I have pointed to what you cited earlier as a basis for why you guys are wrong in a game cited by him and not me. At the same time though, you can't just say 'take my word for it, because I have some obscure experience doing [something], but please disregard one of the industry's most prolific devs who have actually explained their decisions already, even if they make sense'. That's stupid. I trust their design points
because they explained them and they make sense. Not because I'm somehow naive about industry workings.
