What input does MMO magic want to see?

jakin

From here:

"We choose to reveal the game to this extent and this early simply because we wanted to get input from the players."

 

So - what kind of input are you interested in? 

It's understandable that there is a lot of information that can't be shared at the moment - but what sort of areas are of the most use for discussion?

I'm sure that there are a number of systems that are basically designed and set, and others that are pretty much wide open.  I guess I'm just asking if there are any broad areas that the team is interested in soliciting specific input on.

mike470

Originally posted by jakin


From here:
"We choose to reveal the game to this extent and this early simply because we wanted to get input from the players."
 
So - what kind of input are you interested in? 
It's understandable that there is a lot of information that can't be shared at the moment - but what sort of areas are of the most use for discussion?
I'm sure that there are a number of systems that are basically designed and set, and others that are pretty much wide open.  I guess I'm just asking if there are any broad areas that the team is interested in soliciting specific input on.

Well, I am no dev for the game, and I'm sure Jatar will be here to further answer your question...But I'm going to take a little guess...

I'm guessing they wanted to see a reaction from the MMO crowd about a game like this.  It is very important to get the community's opinion, even when they do not give much information about the game.  But with a quest system like this, you have to know about how people feel.  These are only the rough details of what seems like a very interesting game, and you have to make sure people like the concept. 

Also, we do not know how long this game will be in development, you never know if anyone will take the ideas?

Those are my guesses, but what they doing is keeping me on the seat of my chair

Jatar

Mike470 is correct, partly we wanted to see if there was much interest in a dynamic world game that is primarily quest based.  The sheer quantity of emails we have received supporting this idea is encouraging.   It seems there are a LOT of players wanting to break out of the old mold and try something new.  Our hard work has not been in vain. 

 

However, there are many areas of our game that could benefit from additional discussion.  One of these would be player Abilities.  Although we have the player Abilities system designed, it is in no way written in stone at this juncture.  Here are just a couple  issues we have to face:

1) We are allowing players to seek any new Ability they want.  This gives players the freedom to plan ahead and create the character of their choice.  The issue: will this be too confusing or difficult for the casual player?  If the answer is yes, in what ways could we do this, yet make it easy for casual players to understand and enjoy?

2) Once they have an Ability, we are allowing player to improve these Abilities with both study and practice, without cap.   The issue: Eventuall god like characters that unbalance the game.  In what ways should we limit the growth of players (if at all)?

 

We already have solutions for these problems, but it might be interesting to hear from players  and see their solutions or alternate options. 

Another completely different area worth discussing is death.  We are currently planning some penalties for death.  However, we are also planning on offering players more than one way of paying those penalties.  Rather than explain our exact plans, we would love to hear people weigh in on the idea of 'free' death vs. death penalties, and how sever they think penalties (if any)  should be to make the game intersting, without making it annoying.

Additionally, we have only just opened discussion on the game.  Over time we will be adding new information that will then spark new discussion about how the game should and will work.  We value everyone's opinion, and do take the time to read them all.

Jatar

 

mike470

I would like to make several suggestions (although I am sure they have already been gone over)

One is that you say people must study to learn the skill.  Possibly a less experienced person of that skill could learn under another player who knows how to use the skill better.  For instance, I am a new player.  As I walk into the city I meet a friendly player who has a high (I am not sure how these abilities will work, so I will just say level for the time being) level in the skill I am working on.  So I train under him and study up on the skill, like he is the master and I am the apprentice.  Not only would this encourage players to group up, but it would also be a good way for people to communicate in the game.

As for death penalties, I always liked  dying with a penalty.  It puts a little more risk and thought into what your plans are in battle.

Good luck on your work!

Greymain

In many games Death penaltes seem to be a punishment for playing solo. Groups usually have a class to can ressurrect dead players and offset health penalties. Death is a normal result of players pushing themselves and they should be encouraged.

I suggest death is a matter for Divine intervention. Either you build up favour with your god in which case you could ask it to ressurect you. If you can not call due to lack of favour or to limit cost,  be portted to the nearest shrine and a small loss of favour is removed. If you are out of favour with your  God then a penalty in terms of ability and or health is incurred until you are back in favour. Allowing favour to be "bought" by contributing or sacrificing money or items at altars would prevent penalties  getting too harsh. you could still have class/characters who could use their favour to get you resurrected.

I dont like corpse runs they tend to be time wasters and disincentives. they punish solo players again. no problem getting corpse run group after a group wipe.  harder to find help when there is nothing in it for the helper.

jakin

 

Originally posted by Jatar  
1) We are allowing players to seek any new Ability they want.  This gives players the freedom to plan ahead and create the character of their choice.  The issue: will this be too confusing or difficult for the casual player?  If the answer is yes, in what ways could we do this, yet make it easy for casual players to understand and enjoy?
2) Once they have an Ability, we are allowing player to improve these Abilities with both study and practice, without cap.   The issue: Eventuall god like characters that unbalance the game.  In what ways should we limit the growth of players (if at all)?

Thank you Jatar.  I was framing it from the mindset of someone that closely followed the pre-alpha of SWG and was remembering the various discussion threads that cropped up on basic game systems for sake of player feedback.  I was hoping it was likely similar for Citadel.

As to your specific points:

1)  I believe that the "casual player" often gets underestimated in their ability to understand game systems.  Basically - I'm of the opinion that the amount you play the game has little bearing on how well you understand the systems provided:

a)  there is a well-structured and polished tutorial experience, and

b)  systems are well and fully documented on either the website or in the game manual.  (Such documentation can even be solicited from the active playerbase)

With those elements in place I truly believe that anyone can learn a system if they are willing to.

Facing basic facts, the only way an MMO gets away with poorly documented / introduced systems is to model their systems so closely to other popular choices that the players see very little to adapt to.  As CoS is attempting to break the current MMO mold (or maybe mould?) I don't see this as a desired avenue.

In sum - I'd suggest designing as complex a system as is required to achieve the design goal.  Then devote a significant amount of development resources to ensuring a very very polished and thorough newbie experience.  Sure there will be people that complain about the complexity - but there will likely be just as many that cherish it.

 

While on the topic of casual players and skill progression - I would strongly suggest considering a real-time progression model (similar to the one EVE uses).  It is - bar none - the most casual friendly advancement system I've yet encountered, and comes with a couple of other hidden benefits:

- players tend to stay longer because they can keep progressing their character even when they don't have the time or motivation to play.  In fact I've seen people maintain accounts for months after they've moved on to other games because they're not sure if they're done and want to keep progressing their character "just in case".

- it takes a large step towards changing the "grind" mentality of players fostered in other leveling systems.  In EVE you can simply log in and do what you want rather than facing the choice of "grinding out your last bit of XP for a level".  I'm not saying there's no grind in EVE, not by a long shot - but a key element of CoS will be breaking the conventions newer MMO players take as granted.  The concept of a "leveling grind" really must be the first on the chopping block IMO.

 

2)  Very difficult to discuss without more specific information on how the skill system works (i.e. are skill levels additional discrete abilities, or are they mathematical improvements on the ability granted when the skill was first chosen).

If the former (i.e. pick the Ability: CAST FIRE, and get cast fire dart at level 1, fireball at level 2, etc) then I think you're stuck with a hard limit.  I'd go with a system like UO's in this case - where you can choose X number of abilities to take to max level and then be able to drop current abilities in favour of new ones as time goes on.

If the latter (i.e. pick the Ability: CAST FIRE, and each level gives you a more powerful / longer range / etc. spell effect) then there is really no need to hard cap the player.  Simply allow unlimited progression but on an exponential scale of diminishing returns - such that there would be an effective cap, but one that is decided by the player in how they choose to allot their time / skill points.

The latter scenario would be more amenable to having offline skill progression as a component of the system IMO.

 

Finally - the death penalty (apologies for the wall of text).

IMO, death penalties only exist because traditional MMO design emphasises a static world.  If the player wasn't punished for failing they would simply zerg-rush any given objective until they finally win through.  In and of themselves death penalties don't really help the game.

Given that CoS is being designed from a dynamic standpoint - the death penalty can very easily simply be failure in whatever task you were attempting.  If you die and can't return (mechanics of death aside), the village burns to the ground and whatever reason you had to try and prevent that outcome is rendered nul and void.

From this point of view, stacking on a penalty (i.e. loss of items or experience) would really be rubbing salt in a wound.

Now - depending on whether there is a player-crafting system and how it functions, item decay on use and/or on death might be a crucial function.  I would personally go with the use penalty - but that's really integral to any discussion of a crafting system.

Equally - depending on the mechanics involved, there may be a requirement for "rez sickness" or similar to prevent zerg-like effects.  Honestly I was actually a fan of the accumulated "combat fatigue" effect SWG had.  It imposed some downtime (which many people hated) but imposed downtime also seemed to increase community interaction in many cases.

Jesse01

In thinking about how to make a complicated ability system "casual friendly", I started thinking about how I put together a build when playing an RPG (MMO or not). I often take out a piece of paper and write out possibilities for character builds. I'll crunch the numbers, pick the skills, write down notes for  ideas or possibilities to explore, etc. With MMOs, there are often web based stat calculators (like the WoW talent calculators) that help you to do this, but at a pretty basic level.

 

What if a tool like this was integrated into the game itself? But it would need to be more comprehensive than just a stat calc (would need to be able to save builds, make notes, it would probably need to even be able to make suggestions based on your desired play-style, etc.), and it would have to be integrated into the tutorial such that you would have to use it early on to get the hang of planning out a character. It could be a "training journal" of sorts. A tool like this, if done well, would be an MMO-dream-come-true for me.

 

And Jatar, I'm sure you guys are hearing this a lot, but thank you (you being MMO Magic) for daring to be different and daring to dream big. The paradigm shift that you are proposing for this genre is a huge one, but it is definitely the direction that I'd like to see things go. So far, what I've read has described my dream game. Some of what has been said sounds so different and so difficult to implement that I'm hesitant to get too excited, but I'm rooting for you and can't wait to see what you've got hidden up your sleeves.

 

 

jakin

You know - it just struck me.  A great deal of the percieved complexity in MMO skill systems (and combat systems, etc) might be due to the proliferation of numbers and stats in most games.

I have this feeling that a great many players start missing the forest for the trees when it comes to picking skills.  They're so worried about picking a "wrong" build - having less than optimal DPS or an inefficient skill point layout - that they don't pick a build based on what they like or what they'd like to do.

My old DM tried to limit the idea of min/max'ing characters by hiding a lot of the stats - perhaps the same thing would be good for the MMO scene?

Jatar

Originally posted by Jesse01
 
What if a tool like this was integrated into the game itself? But it would need to be more comprehensive than just a stat calc (would need to be able to save builds, make notes, it would probably need to even be able to make suggestions based on your desired play-style, etc.), and it would have to be integrated into the tutorial such that you would have to use it early on to get the hang of planning out a character. It could be a "training journal" of sorts. A tool like this, if done well, would be an MMO-dream-come-true for me.
 

Thanks for the suggestion, but the good news is that our Journal already includes a planning system to shape your character's development.  You can use one of our University Cadres to get a basic plan for the general type of character you want to build, then personalize it with your own modifications.  Or, you can just start from scratch and plan out your own. 

These plans you create are saved in your journal so you can use them for reference each time you need to improve your character (which is fairly often).  You also need this plan to shape your personal story, as you must quest for each ability that you will eventually want to study, so planning ahead is crucial.   After all, you don't want to have some study tokens to distribute into your character and not have the ability you want ready to study.

 

Jatar

Jatar

Originally posted by jakin  
Jakin, since your post was a long one (and we appreciate all the thought you put into it) I am going to respond to some of your suggestions below each one, so I'm changing my text to green.
1)  I believe that the "casual player" often gets underestimated in their ability to understand game systems.  Basically - I'm of the opinion that the amount you play the game has little bearing on how well you understand the systems provided:
a)  there is a well-structured and polished tutorial experience, and
We're planning extensive tutorials, all of which can be skipped, some of which can be done at any time.
b)  systems are well and fully documented on either the website or in the game manual.  (Such documentation can even be solicited from the active playerbase)
We're taking documentation in a different direction, in game.  There are libraries and the League offices where players may go to get information without having to leave the game world.
In sum - I'd suggest designing as complex a system as is required to achieve the design goal.  Then devote a significant amount of development resources to ensuring a very very polished and thorough newbie experience.  Sure there will be people that complain about the complexity - but there will likely be just as many that cherish it.
 We certainly hope you are right, as this is the current plan.


(The Ability system is) Very difficult to discuss without more specific information on how the skill system works (i.e. are skill levels additional discrete abilities, or are they mathematical improvements on the ability granted when the skill was first chosen).
If the former (i.e. pick the Ability: CAST FIRE, and get cast fire dart at level 1, fireball at level 2, etc) then I think you're stuck with a hard limit.  I'd go with a system like UO's in this case - where you can choose X number of abilities to take to max level and then be able to drop current abilities in favour of new ones as time goes on.
If the latter (i.e. pick the Ability: CAST FIRE, and each level gives you a more powerful / longer range / etc. spell effect) then there is really no need to hard cap the player.  Simply allow unlimited progression but on an exponential scale of diminishing returns - such that there would be an effective cap, but one that is decided by the player in how they choose to allot their time / skill points.
Without going into detail, the current design is somewhere in between these two concepts.  Abilities you have and study will increase in power, but if you study them enough you will eventually take them to the next Echelon.  Each Echelon then adds a new wrinkle to the ability.  Then you go through another period of improving the Ability at that Echelon, until you attain the next.   And so on.  We currently have no plans for a cap, and will employ some type of diminishing returns.
Finally - the death penalty (apologies for the wall of text).
IMO, death penalties only exist because traditional MMO design emphasises a static world.  If the player wasn't punished for failing they would simply zerg-rush any given objective until they finally win through.  In and of themselves death penalties don't really help the game.
Given that CoS is being designed from a dynamic standpoint - the death penalty can very easily simply be failure in whatever task you were attempting.  If you die and can't return (mechanics of death aside), the village burns to the ground and whatever reason you had to try and prevent that outcome is rendered nul and void.
From this point of view, stacking on a penalty (i.e. loss of items or experience) would really be rubbing salt in a wound.
Equally - depending on the mechanics involved, there may be a requirement for "rez sickness" or similar to prevent zerg-like effects.  Honestly I was actually a fan of the accumulated "combat fatigue" effect SWG had.  It imposed some downtime (which many people hated) but imposed downtime also seemed to increase community interaction in many cases.
Death is a tricky issue.  We considered the idea of the penalty being the failure of your quest.  This would certainly tie into the fact that you cannot repeat any quest in our game.  Just as time moves on in the world, time moves on in the player's story as well, so there is no 'going back' and trying the same thing again.  However, in a fantasy world that has resurrection (which we do) we had to look at your story in the context of advancing time with that as a part of the reality. 
Example: I'm about to rescue a prisoner who is going to be executed at dawn.  Silly me, my friends and I try a frontal assault on the entry gate of the castle and get our clocks cleaned.  Since we all died we choose to resurrect at a Monastery.  Now... it is still some hours before dawn, the prisoner I was trying to save has still not been executed.  Therefore logically, I can still try to rescue him.  So, in this case death was not an 'end' to my quest, it is ongoing. 
Of course, my previous actions of attacking the guards at the gate have now made them aware of me as an enemy, so I can't just strole in there now (your past actions affect your future, time moves on).  So now I will have to use a disguise, or find a secret entrance, or cause a diversion to get the guards away from the gate for a moment... I'll come up with something
So, given these facts, death may still have to have some other punishment.  The system we are currently planning has options.  As a player you can choose various ways to pay your debt.  However we're not yet willing to go into all the details of the system as it involves one of the primary systems of how health, character progression, abilities and other factors of the world work that is unique to Citadel of Sorcery and something we are keeping under wraps for the time being.  However, it is good to read through your (and other players) opinions and suggestions, then compare them to what we are planning and see if we think players will like our 'secret' plan. 
 
Jatar

 

Jatar

Originally posted by mike470
One is that you say people must study to learn the skill.  Possibly a less experienced person of that skill could learn under another player who knows how to use the skill better.  For instance, I am a new player.  As I walk into the city I meet a friendly player who has a high (I am not sure how these abilities will work, so I will just say level for the time being) level in the skill I am working on.  So I train under him and study up on the skill, like he is the master and I am the apprentice.  Not only would this encourage players to group up, but it would also be a good way for people to communicate in the game.

That is an excellent suggestion, and shows that you are thinking along the same lines.   You will be able to Master an Apprentice in the game.  We tie this into the 'practice' to improve your abilities system.  Players who enjoy helping other players will like this system and it will encourage people to group up without penalizing solo players.  (More on that later.)

Jatar

mike470

A quick suggestion about merchanters/traders-

Say it is the main town.  In the main town, there are rows of empty, unused buildings owned by NPC's.  Now if I were a wealthy merchant, I would want to rent out one of these buildings, that way people know where to buy my items.  Now that I have my shop, work is becoming busy, so I decide to hire an actual player to work for me.  This way it saves time and makes the job easier. 

The point-  Would it be possible for people to actually rent out buildings and use them as shops.  They will have to pay rent to the NPC and everything a normal shop must do.  Also, if they would like to advertise their product, is it possible that there is a newspaper, and people can pay to advertise their product in the newspaper?

 

Scribes-

For some reason, I always liked the idea of learning a language in a game.  For instance, one day I am traveling through the lands, and I come across a run down dungeon.  As I explore this dungeon, I come upon an ancient script with an unknown language on it.  I take my fascinating discovery back to the University.  There, actual players and possibly NPC professors (who already are programed to know the language) who help me decode the language. 

Which leads me to the next idea I always thought was interesting, writing books.  Now that I know this language, I write a book about it, and once I am completed I possibly sell it to the library or a person.

(it is possible if I let my imagination run a little wild on the scribe one )

 

Anofalye

About the deaths...

 

I humbly think that giving options and choices to the players is good.  However, I don't like the idea of giving choice everytime, since basically, each time you died, you have a choice about something negative.  Focus on negativity is always bad.  You don't want the player to feel this:  YOU LOSE A or B, PICK SOMETHING TO LOSE!

 

I would prefer a system where the death penalty is different on every server, and maybe you can switch server anyway you want, or not.  But if you died on server A, then this happen.  If you died on server B, then something else happen.  The choice is linked with the server selection.

 

If you see that all players pick 1 server, well, expend this death penalty to an unpopular server, open up a new server with this same death penalty....or make a variation of the most popular death penalty.

 

Although the advertisement about the death penalty on each server should be clear and easy to find and figure out (kinda no brainer), the first differenciation shouldn't be the death penalty, it might be other rules, or the name, the setting, the popularity of a dev (Jatar server!!!).  Nobody has to be fooled, the death penalty must be easy to see for each server, but again, focus on the positive (Jatar server is positive, while a Permanent Death server for example, even if possibly a good idea, you should promote the positive, it is Jatar selection for example).

Jatar

There are no separate servers in CoS, so that idea is not possible.  As in many things, Citadel of Sorcery is not what you are used to in other MMO games.  (I've explained some about the server system of CoS in other threads, so you can read about it if you want).

As to our death penalty 'choice' system, we don't believe letting a player choose the type of penalty is a negative.   

I can give you an analogy though, you get a ticket for speeding and the judge fines you $200.00, or you can spend 8 hours in Traffic School, or 8 hours community service.  Which would you like to do?  No matter which you pick, you are paying in some fashion for your mistake.  However, people who have money would like the choice of paying that way, while people who don't would rather donate time.  Taking away the choice would not be good.

Unfortunately, I'm not at liberty to explain the system yet, so you'll have to wait to find out the actual details.

Jatar

 

Anofalye

Originally posted by Jatar


There are no separate servers in CoS, so that idea is not possible.  As in many things, Citadel of Sorcery is not what you are used to in other MMO games.  (I've explained some about the server system of CoS in other threads, so you can read about it if you want).
As to our death penalty 'choice' system, we don't believe letting a player choose the type of penalty is a negative.   
I can give you an analogy though, you get a ticket for speeding and the judge fines you $200.00, or you can spend 8 hours in Traffic School, or 8 hours community service.  Which would you like to do?  No matter which you pick, you are paying in some fashion for your mistake.  However, people who have money would like the choice of paying that way, while people who don't would rather donate time.  Taking away the choice would not be good.
Unfortunately, I'm not at liberty to explain the system yet, so you'll have to wait to find out the actual details.
Jatar
 

Then maybe the choice could be premade by the player in a way or another.

 

In your example, you get a ticket, you know what the consequences are, you still got that choice when you take your license, but it isn't ask later on.  This proceed a lot faster to the consequences, and it doesn't make you focus on the negativity as badly...since when you made that choice, it was rhetoric, hypothethic.

 

I really dislike the idea to pick every time I died.  I am angry, I died, then you talk to me about what my choice is?  Not a good idea. :P  You should ask me, prior I experience it, what my preference is...maybe I could change that choice at any time, but it shouldn't ever be asked again.  If I died, it is applied, you don't put that choice in front of me there.

Jatar

 

Originally posted by Anofalye


 
 
Then maybe the choice could be premade by the player in a way or another.
 
In your example, you get a ticket, you know what the consequences are, you still got that choice when you take your license, but it isn't ask later on.  This proceed a lot faster to the consequences, and it doesn't make you focus on the negativity as badly...since when you made that choice, it was rhetoric, hypothethic.
 
I really dislike the idea to pick every time I died.  I am angry, I died, then you talk to me about what my choice is?  Not a good idea. :P  You should ask me, prior I experience it, what my preference is...maybe I could change that choice at any time, but it shouldn't ever be asked again.  If I died, it is applied, you don't put that choice in front of me there.

 

Perhaps a different explanation will help.  Upon death the game does not pop up a choice box.  Your actions decide how you pay.  Your choice is made by what you do, not by a multiple choice question.  My analogy of the ticket wasn't very good at explaining that part.   It's very hard to explain this without being able to tell you the system, so this is the last I'm going to post about this subject.  But you are slightly on the wrong track, so your objection will kind of be a moot point.  Sorry I can't be clearer right now.

Jatar

jakin

Greymain's suggestion could bridge the two viewponts perhaps.

Depending on what divinity your character curries favour with - your death penalty could be different.

i.e.  If you do works in the name of Oompa Loompa - god of wealth and commerce (for instance) then you gain favour by amassing money (and donating some of it as well of course). 

Should you storm the barricade and not do so well Oompa Loompa will grant your resurrection at the cost of some of your favour (which you could earn back over time).

If you don't have enough favour with your divinity, there could be a universal default consequence (probably slightly harsher or more time-consuming to encourage gaining favour).

The only potential problem with allowing for multiple death penalties is the careful balancing act that would need to be done - lest there be Flavour of the Month penalties.

Inevitably (I'd suggest) there would be one method of payment that's easier than others (either through exploit of game system, RMT, out of balance designs or whatever) - leading to everyone choosing that method and rotating with the nerf / balancing.

mike470

Death is a very important issue. I will be looking forwards to when Jatar will be able to give more info

Hexxeity

An interesting death penalty I've seen discussed recently in other games it not a penalty so much as the removal of a bonus.

As you play, you build up a bonus of some kind (stats, XP rate, whatever).  But that goes away when you die.

So there you have it -- an incentive not to die, but nothing permanent is really taken away from you if you do.

Of course, this really is about the same as XP loss or XP debt when you look at it mathematically, but I guess the psychological reaction is not quite so harsh.

Whatever you decide to use as a death penalty, my only request is that it not be extremely time-intensive.  I actually like the penalty of failing your quest.  Life goes on, better luck next time.  There will be other quests.

I do have a question, though.  In a world where resurrection is commonplace, why would I be in any rush to save a prisoner from being executed?  Can't I just collect his parts and patch him up the next day?

Jatar

 

Originally posted by Hexxeity


An interesting death penalty I've seen discussed recently in other games it not a penalty so much as the removal of a bonus.
As you play, you build up a bonus of some kind (stats, XP rate, whatever).  But that goes away when you die.
So there you have it -- an incentive not to die, but nothing permanent is really taken away from you if you do.
Of course, this really is about the same as XP loss or XP debt when you look at it mathematically, but I guess the psychological reaction is not quite so harsh.
Whatever you decide to use as a death penalty, my only request is that it not be extremely time-intensive.  I actually like the penalty of failing your quest.  Life goes on, better luck next time.  There will be other quests.
I do have a question, though.  In a world where resurrection is commonplace, why would I be in any rush to save a prisoner from being executed?  Can't I just collect his parts and patch him up the next day?

The problem I see with bonus removal is that once you die you have lost your bonus, and now there is nothing stopping you from zerg-rushing your opponents.   However, our system (you know, the one I'm not allowed to explain yet) does have aspects to it that you will like based on what you mentioned.  There, I danced around that without actually saying anything!  

 

 

As to your question about resurrection... that I can answer outright.   As one of the Fallen Heroes, you can be resurrected at any time.  However, it is EXPENSIVE for other people in the world.  So expensive that most could never afford it, and you aren't going to want to pay for them either.  But your resurrections are paid for by the Sorcerers, your commanders.  Thus, most people out there must be saved, and letting them be rendered into parts for later collection would be a very bad (and expensive) thing to do.

jagust05

My guess would be that resurrection only applies to PC's and not to NPC's, that is of course assuming that the "prisoner is an NPC.  But i don't know, i guess only Jatar can really answer that question.

jakin

That actually raises a question for me.  Just how commonplace is magic in the Citadel world?

My gaming (tabletop) background predisposed me to liking relatively low magic worlds, ones where magic was still an arcane practice that only rare individuals actually practiced.

Needless to say, when I started playing fantasy-based MMOs it was a bit of an adjustment to get used to particles fountaining out of every orifice and every second person being a mage / wielding enough magic gear to depopulate the planet.

So - here's hoping for a world where magic is present but not terribly common. 

 

Unrelated (kinda) note.  It would appear there has already been some work done on the fiction and backstory for the world. 

Jatar - do you think you could do a "look over there" to whoever is in charge and post some elements of the fiction to the website? 

Hexxeity

Well, jakin, the game is called Citadel of Sorcery ...

jakin

 

Originally posted by Hexxeity


Well, jakin, the game is called Citadel of Sorcery ...

Oh I know, I know.  It isn't as though I'm hoping there will be NO magic or anything.

 

 

I'm just more interested in magic being an obscure thing only practiced by a relative few - rather than the more EQ / WoW paradigm where everything you own and do sets off an eldrich fireworks display.

Jatar

Originally posted by jakin


 
 
Originally posted by Hexxeity


Well, jakin, the game is called Citadel of Sorcery ...

Oh I know, I know.  It isn't as though I'm hoping there will be NO magic or anything.

 

 

 

I'm just more interested in magic being an obscure thing only practiced by a relative few - rather than the more EQ / WoW paradigm where everything you own and do sets off an eldrich fireworks display.

Well, there seems to be two separate issues here, the use of magic and the display of magic.

I can tell you that magic Abilities will be readily available since two of the five Leagues are magic based.   (Leagues are what you join when you want to Quest for an Ability you wish to learn).

However... the second issue is the proliferation of partical effects while magic is being used.  That is different.  I'm not sure what the end result of this will be in the game yet, as we haven't created the partical effects for Abilities yet.   The problem is that many players (and publishers) like their 'flash and bang'.  They want to see lots of colorful particle effects in a game.  Where others, like you, don't want to see so much (and I don't blame you, they get in the way of seeing and can slow your frame rate down when too many are going off at once). 

I wonder if the answer is to have the effects available, but to let players turn them down or even off if they choose?  As you can see this is one of the areas still under discussion at our company.

Jatar

jakin

I'll always pull for more customization of the user experience.  A simple two-state system (understated particles vs. ostentatious) would be fine by me.  (Just turning particles off is seldom an option given the need for visual cues sometimes)

 

Same thing as chat bubbles I suppose.  So many gamers hate chat bubbles with a passion, but I like them and find them more immersive than watching a chat box all the time.

/shrug