I stated the quality of either depends on the quality of the maker.
the quality of scenarios depends on the quality of the creator no different than pure hand done quest
You can't quantify someone's taste into numbers that favor your opinion and be taken serious.
My opinion is based on logic and evidence: hand-made quest systems are almost universally better than procedural quest systems. There is strong evidence of hand-made quests being the best quests on the market, while procedural quests are consistently less excellent.
Your opinion is based on nothing. You've cited zero evidence of a procedural quest system being better than WOW's. Zero evidence. Not a single game with procedural quests has been mentioned by you. None. No evidence, no argument.
Your "quality of the creator" nonsense is pure gibberish. It exemplifies your lack of logic that you even think it matters to bring it up. When I compare things, I compare them fairly. I've always been assuming a fair comparison where the quality of the creator is factored out of the equation. Logically if Blizzard did procedural quests, they would be worse than Blizzard's hand-made quests.
The reason why is that time spent making something procedural is less time spent making it work in the well-paced manner of a well-told story. With hand-made questing everything is paced out correctly, while in procedural questing the story beats offer inferior pacing, potentially inferior ordering, while suffering inferior quality or quantity or both (because either you have a low-quality grinding pool of unrelated quests OR you have quests that procedurally fit together well but are fewer in number (because of the extra dev time dedicated to making them procedural) and sometimes you end up with both penalties (you spend the extra dev time and still end up with a low-quality experience that doesn't flow well.))
Lol, do you really believe what you are writing or do you back yourself into a corner bark like an old ladies chihuahua? What evidence would I provide? I have an opinion that procedural content is as good in quality as the system and content? Its freakin obvious.
Again pacing of the story or whatever what makes a good story in Axehilt's world/opinion depends on the system created to deliver procedural content. And you do realize even what you think is a good story is an opinion of your's as inconceivable as it must sound.
Procedural content is basically in its infancy and largely under utilized. But what you are saying is akin to asking why would a master shoe maker use a factory than make master shoes by hand. Yes, creating the first factories would be tough and the quality less. But over time the techniques improve. And you can produce them in mass and in flexible ways not tied to hard permanency developer content requires.
But to the meat. Vast majority of MMORPG quest are of a technical quality that could be done procedurally outside of the theatrics of voice over and cut scenes.
Kill X of Y: You have to defeat a certain number of the same opponent.
Kill [Named] Y: Some mob has gotten tough enough to earn itself a name.
Delivery (aka Fedex): The quest giver wants something delivered to someone else.
Collect X of Y: A character is tasked with finding a certain number of objects of a certain type to continue the quest.
Escort: Lead another NPC from point A to point B.
Locate: A particular individual, item or location needs to be found.
Defend: Defend an NPC, item or place for a fixed period of time against waves of attackers.
Interact: Slightly different to Locate in that the specified NPC / item needs to be activated by the player as part of the mission requirement.
These are basically mechanic behind almost all basic MMORPG quest/task. MMORPG are filled with filler quest that don't add anything to the narrative. They are the majority. They are time sink content designed to give players something to do and pace exp. These quest are far more common than the quest you are talking about. They could be done automated.
Your argument is that essentially machines fully automated creating a Toyota Camry are bad because there are handmade super cars of better quality(which I fanboy secretly). Yes, we know WoW makes the best of the best in your eyes. But the vast majority of their quest and the vast majority in the genre are still basic filler quest.
Have you heard that there are seven basic stories in the world? That's it. Google around everybody.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Lol, do you really believe what you are writing or do you back yourself into a corner bark like an old ladies chihuahua? What evidence would I provide? I have an opinion that procedural content is as good in quality as the system and content? Its freakin obvious.
Again pacing of the story or whatever what makes a good story in Axehilt's world/opinion depends on the system created to deliver procedural content. And you do realize even what you think is a good story is an opinion of your's as inconceivable as it must sound.
Procedural content is basically in its infancy and largely under utilized. But what you are saying is akin to asking why would a master shoe maker use a factory than make master shoes by hand. Yes, creating the first factories would be tough and the quality less. But over time the techniques improve. And you can produce them in mass and in flexible ways not tied to hard permanency developer content requires.
But to the meat. Vast majority of MMORPG quest are of a technical quality that could be done procedurally outside of the theatrics of voice over and cut scenes.
Kill X of Y: You have to defeat a certain number of the same opponent.
Kill [Named] Y: Some mob has gotten tough enough to earn itself a name.
Delivery (aka Fedex): The quest giver wants something delivered to someone else.
Collect X of Y: A character is tasked with finding a certain number of objects of a certain type to continue the quest.
Escort: Lead another NPC from point A to point B.
Locate: A particular individual, item or location needs to be found.
Defend: Defend an NPC, item or place for a fixed period of time against waves of attackers.
Interact: Slightly different to Locate in that the specified NPC / item needs to be activated by the player as part of the mission requirement.
These are basically mechanic behind almost all basic MMORPG quest/task. MMORPG are filled with filler quest that don't add anything to the narrative. They are the majority. They are time sink content designed to give players something to do and pace exp. These quest are far more common than the quest you are talking about. They could be done automated.
Your argument is that essentially machines fully automated creating a Toyota Camry are bad because there are handmade super cars of better quality(which I fanboy secretly). Yes, we know WoW makes the best of the best in your eyes. But the vast majority of their quest and the vast majority in the genre are still basic filler quest.
All opinions aren't created equal. Those rooted in evidence and logic are superior.
For example, some people hold the opinion that climate change isn't happening. Others hold the opinion (based on the evidence) that it is happening. The deniers' opinions are simply wrong -- having an opinion that climate change isn't happening doesn't magically change reality.
So don't act like you don't need evidence. You do.
What evidence do you need? Games where procedural quests are visibly superior to hand-made quests.
Your shoe analogy is great because it specifically mentions how industrialization has produced a higher quantity of shoes, but not necessarily a higher quality of shoes. (Remember we're discussing quality.)
Your shoe analogy isn't perfect, because the shoe-maker doesn't make one pair of shoes that's sold to everyone. The game programmer does do that with their product. Games are a shared product. The programming team is going to create one game for millions of players, so the focus is on quality not quantity.
A real-life shared product would make a better analogy for the purposes of our discussion. Like a government building. Capitol buildings aren't churned out of factories, they're 'hand-made' one-off construction projects focused on quality (which in this case is a measure of both building longevity and the ability to efficiently facilitate government meetings). And so capitols are constructed of superior materials and with layouts that facilitate those large discussions.
Look if all you're saying is eventually (in 2040 or whenever) the Singularity will occur and one output of that will be AI that creates better art than humans, then sure I'd agree that seems plausible. But in the context of 2016 with current game-making technology there is no evidence that it makes sense to pursue that method today.
Your list of quests again is an oversimplification which ignores the details that produce superior quests. Yes, if you ignore everything that contributes to quality then "why not mass-produce it in a factory?" might seem like a reasonable question. But how about we don't ignore storyline, presentation, and hand-made mechanic choices and realize that both of these things are critical to good quest design?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Lol, do you really believe what you are writing or do you back yourself into a corner bark like an old ladies chihuahua? What evidence would I provide? I have an opinion that procedural content is as good in quality as the system and content? Its freakin obvious.
Again pacing of the story or whatever what makes a good story in Axehilt's world/opinion depends on the system created to deliver procedural content. And you do realize even what you think is a good story is an opinion of your's as inconceivable as it must sound.
Procedural content is basically in its infancy and largely under utilized. But what you are saying is akin to asking why would a master shoe maker use a factory than make master shoes by hand. Yes, creating the first factories would be tough and the quality less. But over time the techniques improve. And you can produce them in mass and in flexible ways not tied to hard permanency developer content requires.
But to the meat. Vast majority of MMORPG quest are of a technical quality that could be done procedurally outside of the theatrics of voice over and cut scenes.
Kill X of Y: You have to defeat a certain number of the same opponent.
Kill [Named] Y: Some mob has gotten tough enough to earn itself a name.
Delivery (aka Fedex): The quest giver wants something delivered to someone else.
Collect X of Y: A character is tasked with finding a certain number of objects of a certain type to continue the quest.
Escort: Lead another NPC from point A to point B.
Locate: A particular individual, item or location needs to be found.
Defend: Defend an NPC, item or place for a fixed period of time against waves of attackers.
Interact: Slightly different to Locate in that the specified NPC / item needs to be activated by the player as part of the mission requirement.
These are basically mechanic behind almost all basic MMORPG quest/task. MMORPG are filled with filler quest that don't add anything to the narrative. They are the majority. They are time sink content designed to give players something to do and pace exp. These quest are far more common than the quest you are talking about. They could be done automated.
Your argument is that essentially machines fully automated creating a Toyota Camry are bad because there are handmade super cars of better quality(which I fanboy secretly). Yes, we know WoW makes the best of the best in your eyes. But the vast majority of their quest and the vast majority in the genre are still basic filler quest.
All opinions aren't created equal. Those rooted in evidence and logic are superior.
For example, some people hold the opinion that climate change isn't happening. Others hold the opinion (based on the evidence) that it is happening. The deniers' opinions are simply wrong -- having an opinion that climate change isn't happening doesn't magically change reality.
So don't act like you don't need evidence. You do.
What evidence do you need? Games where procedural quests are visibly superior to hand-made quests.
Your shoe analogy is great because it specifically mentions how industrialization has produced a higher quantity of shoes, but not necessarily a higher quality of shoes. (Remember we're discussing quality.)
Your shoe analogy isn't perfect, because the shoe-maker doesn't make one pair of shoes that's sold to everyone. The game programmer does do that with their product. Games are a shared product. The programming team is going to create one game for millions of players, so the focus is on quality not quantity.
A real-life shared product would make a better analogy for the purposes of our discussion. Like a government building. Capitol buildings aren't churned out of factories, they're 'hand-made' one-off construction projects focused on quality (which in this case is a measure of both building longevity and the ability to efficiently facilitate government meetings). And so capitols are constructed of superior materials and with layouts that facilitate those large discussions.
Look if all you're saying is eventually (in 2040 or whenever) the Singularity will occur and one output of that will be AI that creates better art than humans, then sure I'd agree that seems plausible. But in the context of 2016 with current game-making technology there is no evidence that it makes sense to pursue that method today.
Your list of quests again is an oversimplification which ignores the details that produce superior quests. Yes, if you ignore everything that contributes to quality then "why not mass-produce it in a factory?" might seem like a reasonable question. But how about we don't ignore storyline, presentation, and hand-made mechanic choices and realize that both of these things are critical to good quest design?
Opinion has to be in a subject with something objective to judge as right or wrong. I don't have to have evidence for a subjective opinion. I can simply state I like vanilla ice cream. There is no need for me to break down why it taste better. It just does... to me. I would prefer personalized quest that are average to above average than static content that I have to share with everyone that many times goes against my characters lore.
Again you ignore that most people creating shoes are not master shoe makers and most shoes produced are not master level. This why mass production of shoes make sense because the quality is high at this point. This is where quest are in this genre are because its not really practical to sit there and craft masterful quest after quest. Money and time are big factors. Not to mention talent lacking by many developers. This is why you have filler quest to give players things to do.
That is why procedural questing is very practical. At its basic level it can produce filler quest level quest. You can mass produce them, you can personalize them and do not require static content like developer content. This is already possible not something you have to wait until 2040. Creating a system that can create personalized average content goes a long way. Having a quest just for me goes further than heavily scripted content that's on youtube or 20 guys next to me are doing the same thing. Its a quality of its own to do a decent quest that is one of one. Not to mention if I want a heavily scripted instanced quest I just as well play single player game.
All opinions aren't created equal. Those rooted in evidence and logic are superior.
This is certainly true. And it is exacerbated when individuals try to claim authority over things they have no familiarity with. Like this situation with you. Your argument is predicated on the one thing you seem to be familiar with, while consequently ignoring quitea lotof evidenceand logic that you have apparently never even looked at before.
It may not be intentional confirmation bias, but once you've deigned to take a stance based on incomplete information and reject any new information that may change your opinion, you've already forfeited any claim to a rational argument on the matter.
An unfamiliarity with technology is not an excuse to ignore said technology or pretend it does not exist.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I prefer linear content. Although the exception would be a real "living world" version of GW2 events with much more complex arrays of possibilities.
All opinions aren't created equal. Those rooted in evidence and logic are superior.
It may not be intentional confirmation bias
I am not sure how it does not boil down to this. His opinion when you get through the pretense is that linear quest are better because WoW's best quest are the best quest because my opinion = fact or more right than yours. He is dismissive the other majority quest that are basically text/voice over painted over basic task being used in the linear quest quality because it doesn't fit his narrative.
On the other hand I have to not only give evidence that my subjective opinion is right, I can't use logical theory of practical use . I can't say that system delivery and content creation is based on the quality of the creator. Showing the average MMORPG quest could be procedurally created not addressed. Ignore positives outside of pure story being flexibility, quanity and personalize the story.
So basically its WoW's best quest prove that his opinion is correct based on the fact that WoW's best quest are the best.
It all depends. In a single player rpg I prefer a strong story which usually requires a somewhat linear path, albeit with some choices to make.
In multiplayer games I always prefer a virtual world with lots of paths to take. Watching others and my own experiences shape the world can also be a great story.
I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I prefer linear content. Although the exception would be a real "living world" version of GW2 events with much more complex arrays of possibilities.
There is nothing wrong with liking linear content. I just rather my whole MMORPG not be designed around linear content and static worlds.
Opinion has to be in a subject with something objective to judge as right or wrong. I don't have to have evidence for a subjective opinion. I can simply state I like vanilla ice cream. There is no need for me to break down why it taste better. It just does... to me. I would prefer personalized quest that are average to above average than static content that I have to share with everyone that many times goes against my characters lore.
Again you ignore that most people creating shoes are not master shoe makers and most shoes produced are not master level. This why mass production of shoes make sense because the quality is high at this point. This is where quest are in this genre are because its not really practical to sit there and craft masterful quest after quest. Money and time are big factors. Not to mention talent lacking by many developers. This is why you have filler quest to give players things to do.
That is why procedural questing is very practical. At its basic level it can produce filler quest level quest. You can mass produce them, you can personalize them and do not require static content like developer content. This is already possible not something you have to wait until 2040. Creating a system that can create personalized average content goes a long way. Having a quest just for me goes further than heavily scripted content that's on youtube or 20 guys next to me are doing the same thing. Its a quality of its own to do a decent quest that is one of one. Not to mention if I want a heavily scripted instanced quest I just as well play single player game.
Climate-deniers "don't have to have evidence" for their subjective opinion either, but it's the lack of evidence that makes their opinion blatantly wrong.
If you simply prefer procedural quests, that's fine.
But the discussion has been around the objective quality (and resulting success) of each quest method; the points made about how hand-made quest systems are superior revolve around the logic that with an identical number of dev-hours and dev skill, procedural quest systems produce lower quality, and the lack of evidence of procedural-quest-driven games being equal or higher quality to hand-made quest systems.
Why are you replying to a post that explicitly invalidated the shoe-maker analogy? It just means your response is countered before it's even typed out. Games are shared products, they aren't shoes where mass-production is required to produce shoes (individual products) for everyone. It simply doesn't matter if 80% of construction companies are crap, because the capitol-building contract will go to the one best construction company and the time and money will be spent ensuring it's a very high quality product -- it should be, because it's a shared public building and so it wouldn't make sense to churn those buildings out with a low-quality high-capacity company.
The majority of quests in WOW are mini-arcs within larger story arcs within giant xpack story arcs. For example I was playing up my mage yesterday in Talador and followed the arc of securing the area from Iron Horde while building up my presence there, which included smaller arcs of an offensive commanded by Durotan/Gazlowe where you use Gazlowe's gadgetry and engineering expertise to beat them back. If your definition of "filler" is "anything that's not the Final End Boss" then yeah there's a lot of filler. But in reality I think every single quest I did over the weekend fit into the larger storyline, and therefore wasn't filler.
Procedural quests aren't "practical" except for bargain-bin MMORPGs that have no interest in providing engaging content. If you want to recreate the meaningless missions of Anarchy Online that just churned out a little bonus XP for going to some randomized place, then sure you can quickly produce a low-quality game to do that. But the state of the art for MMORPG design is way higher than that currently and by producing content of that quality you're going to create a game nobody really wants to play. MMORPG players simply aren't seeking lower-quality MMORPGs than currently exist.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You just repeated an argument using logic already proven false. You are running in circles with your tangent and offering nothing new to the conversation. You have even repeated mistakes with your "bargain bin" and story arc commentary. Choosing to block out or ignore all evidence to the contrary is not logic, it's willful ignorance.
The discussion has been around the capability of the technology and how it can be applied. You didn't like that conversation so you made up a different one.
We've already gone over how procedural content with a director AI can utilize story arc mechanics to build logical frameworks for events, draw on actors from the game world to make at least semi-permanent elements, and even use the tracking of player activities to create more tailored and context sensitive events to not just deliver an interesting story, but a personal one.
Such technology doesn't come out of the aether, and you can only pick away at the same old technology so long before you hit a brick wall. Honestly, we hit that a long time ago with the "hand crafted linear" structure and we already know it's a sub-par fit for a multi-user and especially massive-user world because it forces many undesirable elements (static game world, lack of meaningful decisions to the greater community, the "everyone is the chosen one" problem, etc). Progress needs to be made if we want a MMO that delivers on a better game world at this point.
Vouch for stagnation as much as you want axe, but there are others that want progress.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Opinion has to be in a subject with something objective to judge as right or wrong. I don't have to have evidence for a subjective opinion. I can simply state I like vanilla ice cream. There is no need for me to break down why it taste better. It just does... to me. I would prefer personalized quest that are average to above average than static content that I have to share with everyone that many times goes against my characters lore.
Again you ignore that most people creating shoes are not master shoe makers and most shoes produced are not master level. This why mass production of shoes make sense because the quality is high at this point. This is where quest are in this genre are because its not really practical to sit there and craft masterful quest after quest. Money and time are big factors. Not to mention talent lacking by many developers. This is why you have filler quest to give players things to do.
That is why procedural questing is very practical. At its basic level it can produce filler quest level quest. You can mass produce them, you can personalize them and do not require static content like developer content. This is already possible not something you have to wait until 2040. Creating a system that can create personalized average content goes a long way. Having a quest just for me goes further than heavily scripted content that's on youtube or 20 guys next to me are doing the same thing. Its a quality of its own to do a decent quest that is one of one. Not to mention if I want a heavily scripted instanced quest I just as well play single player game.
Climate-deniers "don't have to have evidence" for their subjective opinion either, but it's the lack of evidence that makes their opinion blatantly wrong.
If you simply prefer procedural quests, that's fine.
But the discussion has been around the objective quality (and resulting success) of each quest method; the points made about how hand-made quest systems are superior revolve around the logic that with an identical number of dev-hours and dev skill, procedural quest systems produce lower quality, and the lack of evidence of procedural-quest-driven games being equal or higher quality to hand-made quest systems.
Why are you replying to a post that explicitly invalidated the shoe-maker analogy? It just means your response is countered before it's even typed out. Games are shared products, they aren't shoes where mass-production is required to produce shoes (individual products) for everyone. It simply doesn't matter if 80% of construction companies are crap, because the capitol-building contract will go to the one best construction company and the time and money will be spent ensuring it's a very high quality product -- it should be, because it's a shared public building and so it wouldn't make sense to churn those buildings out with a low-quality high-capacity company.
The majority of quests in WOW are mini-arcs within larger story arcs within giant xpack story arcs. For example I was playing up my mage yesterday in Talador and followed the arc of securing the area from Iron Horde while building up my presence there, which included smaller arcs of an offensive commanded by Durotan/Gazlowe where you use Gazlowe's gadgetry and engineering expertise to beat them back. If your definition of "filler" is "anything that's not the Final End Boss" then yeah there's a lot of filler. But in reality I think every single quest I did over the weekend fit into the larger storyline, and therefore wasn't filler.
Procedural quests aren't "practical" except for bargain-bin MMORPGs that have no interest in providing engaging content. If you want to recreate the meaningless missions of Anarchy Online that just churned out a little bonus XP for going to some randomized place, then sure you can quickly produce a low-quality game to do that. But the state of the art for MMORPG design is way higher than that currently and by producing content of that quality you're going to create a game nobody really wants to play. MMORPG players simply aren't seeking lower-quality MMORPGs than currently exist.
Again, vast majority of MMORPG quest are filler types. Its like that for logical and practical reason of money, time and talent. Filler quest are as stated many times before which you should know done to fill time(time sink) as content soley. Meaning, when you go to fight wolves with everyone else in the game to kill 10 of them for farmer Bob its a filler quest. This and few others are the majority "quest." You're anecdotal evidence of a few new expansion quest from the highest earning is not reproducable. Those can be done procedurally.
By the way, WoW is full of filler quest. WoW literally invented filler quest sheesh. Maybe in this expansion you see you're Blizzard fanboy level of quest but how many game companies make as much as WoW to make multi-million dollar expansions and make tons off it? How many western developers are investing huge sums to make a new MMORPG with 100% epic questing? Even Bioware's SWTOR is full of simplistic task hidden behind voiceovers and cut scenes.
Practical because in the new era for Western MMORPG its going to be lower budget. They're going to have to rely on what the format's strength is player centric. Making generic quest that are flexible, automated and non-static goes a long way. This allows you to have sandbox and competent non static personal content. It also allows you to focus on themepark areas to be high quality.
I prefer non linear; can't stand linear. Quest hubs are linear if, as in most cases, the xp obtained by doing the quest hubs motivates EVERYONE to do the quests.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
I like playing games. If a game has either of those and I end up having a positive experience does it matter if it is linear or non-linear?
Same here. World of Warcraft was the most fun cattle chute I ever funneled myself through. On the flip side, I've had just as much fun in ARK: Evolved and EVE Online. It's more about the experience than the type of content for me.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Again, vast majority of MMORPG quest are filler types. Its like that for logical and practical reason of money, time and talent. Filler quest are as stated many times before which you should know done to fill time(time sink) as content soley. Meaning, when you go to fight wolves with everyone else in the game to kill 10 of them for farmer Bob its a filler quest. This and few others are the majority "quest." You're anecdotal evidence of a few new expansion quest from the highest earning is not reproducable. Those can be done procedurally.
By the way, WoW is full of filler quest. WoW literally invented filler quest sheesh. Maybe in this expansion you see you're Blizzard fanboy level of quest but how many game companies make as much as WoW to make multi-million dollar expansions and make tons off it? How many western developers are investing huge sums to make a new MMORPG with 100% epic questing? Even Bioware's SWTOR is full of simplistic task hidden behind voiceovers and cut scenes.
Practical because in the new era for Western MMORPG its going to be lower budget. They're going to have to rely on what the format's strength is player centric. Making generic quest that are flexible, automated and non-static goes a long way. This allows you to have sandbox and competent non static personal content. It also allows you to focus on themepark areas to be high quality.
You seem to be working off an 80/20-based definition of "filler". If you're automatically labeling a game's bottom 80% quests as "filler" (because that's your definition of filler) then that will make you completely incapable of discussing this topic. Under that ridiculous definition, the best MMORPG in the world has 80% filler quests and the worst game has 80% filler and hand-made quests are 80% filler and procedural quests are 80% filler.
The "bottom 80%" definition represents a deliberate ignorance of quality. If you're unwilling or unable to recognize that factors like gameplay, story, and visuals are all involved in the perceived quality of a quest, then you're not equipped to discuss this topic.
So if we're discussing quality, and we are, then we must admit that many WOW quests (and the vast majority of lvl 70+ quests) are high-quality due to how they fit their narrative, offer varied gameplay, and (especially 90+) take place more in the game world than as a simple text-box.
But again, this is a comparative discussion. It doesn't matter where the 'average player rating' of a WOW quest falls -- what matters is that that average rating would be higher than if Blizzard (with their same dev skill) had implemented a procedural quest system instead. Hand-made quests are higher quality than procedural quests.
The comparison matters because -- high budget or low -- a company wants to be efficient. Procedural quests are not the best bang for your buck. Hand-made quests are.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Again, vast majority of MMORPG quest are filler types. Its like that for logical and practical reason of money, time and talent. Filler quest are as stated many times before which you should know done to fill time(time sink) as content soley. Meaning, when you go to fight wolves with everyone else in the game to kill 10 of them for farmer Bob its a filler quest. This and few others are the majority "quest." You're anecdotal evidence of a few new expansion quest from the highest earning is not reproducable. Those can be done procedurally.
By the way, WoW is full of filler quest. WoW literally invented filler quest sheesh. Maybe in this expansion you see you're Blizzard fanboy level of quest but how many game companies make as much as WoW to make multi-million dollar expansions and make tons off it? How many western developers are investing huge sums to make a new MMORPG with 100% epic questing? Even Bioware's SWTOR is full of simplistic task hidden behind voiceovers and cut scenes.
Practical because in the new era for Western MMORPG its going to be lower budget. They're going to have to rely on what the format's strength is player centric. Making generic quest that are flexible, automated and non-static goes a long way. This allows you to have sandbox and competent non static personal content. It also allows you to focus on themepark areas to be high quality.
You seem to be working off an 80/20-based definition of "filler". If you're automatically labeling a game's bottom 80% quests as "filler" (because that's your definition of filler) then that will make you completely incapable of discussing this topic. Under that ridiculous definition, the best MMORPG in the world has 80% filler quests and the worst game has 80% filler and hand-made quests are 80% filler and procedural quests are 80% filler.
The "bottom 80%" definition represents a deliberate ignorance of quality. If you're unwilling or unable to recognize that factors like gameplay, story, and visuals are all involved in the perceived quality of a quest, then you're not equipped to discuss this topic.
So if we're discussing quality, and we are, then we must admit that many WOW quests (and the vast majority of lvl 70+ quests) are high-quality due to how they fit their narrative, offer varied gameplay, and (especially 90+) take place more in the game world than as a simple text-box.
But again, this is a comparative discussion. It doesn't matter where the 'average player rating' of a WOW quest falls -- what matters is that that average rating would be higher than if Blizzard (with their same dev skill) had implemented a procedural quest system instead. Hand-made quests are higher quality than procedural quests.
The comparison matters because -- high budget or low -- a company wants to be efficient. Procedural quests are not the best bang for your buck. Hand-made quests are.
Right vast majority of quest are of low quality to the point they could be done automated. I fail to see how automation isn't the best bang for you buck. Especially when you can save more by making a game that's more player centric.
I prefer a Skyrim type of game. Having linear content to tell a story, but also content that allows you to explore and find things on my own keeps me busy and entertained. In Elder Scrolls: Oblivion I completed a dozen story quests and had hundreds of hours on doing side quests.
Again, vast majority of MMORPG quest are filler types. Its like that for logical and practical reason of money, time and talent. Filler quest are as stated many times before which you should know done to fill time(time sink) as content soley. Meaning, when you go to fight wolves with everyone else in the game to kill 10 of them for farmer Bob its a filler quest. This and few others are the majority "quest." You're anecdotal evidence of a few new expansion quest from the highest earning is not reproducable. Those can be done procedurally.
By the way, WoW is full of filler quest. WoW literally invented filler quest sheesh. Maybe in this expansion you see you're Blizzard fanboy level of quest but how many game companies make as much as WoW to make multi-million dollar expansions and make tons off it? How many western developers are investing huge sums to make a new MMORPG with 100% epic questing? Even Bioware's SWTOR is full of simplistic task hidden behind voiceovers and cut scenes.
Practical because in the new era for Western MMORPG its going to be lower budget. They're going to have to rely on what the format's strength is player centric. Making generic quest that are flexible, automated and non-static goes a long way. This allows you to have sandbox and competent non static personal content. It also allows you to focus on themepark areas to be high quality.
You seem to be working off an 80/20-based definition of "filler". If you're automatically labeling a game's bottom 80% quests as "filler" (because that's your definition of filler) then that will make you completely incapable of discussing this topic. Under that ridiculous definition, the best MMORPG in the world has 80% filler quests and the worst game has 80% filler and hand-made quests are 80% filler and procedural quests are 80% filler.
The "bottom 80%" definition represents a deliberate ignorance of quality. If you're unwilling or unable to recognize that factors like gameplay, story, and visuals are all involved in the perceived quality of a quest, then you're not equipped to discuss this topic.
So if we're discussing quality, and we are, then we must admit that many WOW quests (and the vast majority of lvl 70+ quests) are high-quality due to how they fit their narrative, offer varied gameplay, and (especially 90+) take place more in the game world than as a simple text-box.
But again, this is a comparative discussion. It doesn't matter where the 'average player rating' of a WOW quest falls -- what matters is that that average rating would be higher than if Blizzard (with their same dev skill) had implemented a procedural quest system instead. Hand-made quests are higher quality than procedural quests.
The comparison matters because -- high budget or low -- a company wants to be efficient. Procedural quests are not the best bang for your buck. Hand-made quests are.
The entirety of your argument right here can be cut down to "But the end-game quests are slightly more interesting, ignore the vast majority of the game's content".
Beyond that you just repeated the conjecture that is your opinion of "custom built quests are better" without any kind of supporting logic.
If a game had 100% custom quest content where the majority wasn't quickly assembled progression tasks, you might have had a point. Not even WoW does that though because there is an aspect of efficiency you forgot about. Making "hand made" content that is high-quality costs a good amount of money. Every sequence, every animation, every audio line and soundtrack, every asset of a "quality" quest being tailored is an additional cost above the norm. It is not giving you the best "bang for your buck" to see all the quests built that way because you will quickly see your operating budget balloon to silly proportions if you attempt it.
Like the reality of WoW is that even a majority of their new and endgame quests are not up to such a standard. Most of them are, in reality, still a short dialogue interaction between running to another point to repeat one of a select few activities. The only difference between that content and a prodecurally generated quest is that a human slapped the components together instead of a machine, but the resulting quality of the content is functionally the same at that level.
If you want to get higher quality out of a procedural system there's already been methods explained of how you can do that and tech to do it with.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Right vast majority of quest are of low quality to the point they could be done automated. I fail to see how automation isn't the best bang for you buck. Especially when you can save more by making a game that's more player centric.
Educate yourself by playing the most recent WOW expansion. There is no automated procedural way to create quests of that quality.
Until you're educated you can't hold an educated conversation on the topic.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Right vast majority of quest are of low quality to the point they could be done automated. I fail to see how automation isn't the best bang for you buck. Especially when you can save more by making a game that's more player centric.
Educate yourself by playing the most recent WOW expansion. There is no automated procedural way to create quests of that quality.
Until you're educated you can't hold an educated conversation on the topic.
Is there a point at which you are willing to toss out broken records when you realize they no longer work, or are you really that adamant that your opinions are that far above reality that facts are no longer important?
Talk about pot calling the kettle black with that education statement.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Give me a roller coaster ride like the Mass Effect series does. I want non-stop excitement until the ride is over.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Right vast majority of quest are of low quality to the point they could be done automated. I fail to see how automation isn't the best bang for you buck. Especially when you can save more by making a game that's more player centric.
Educate yourself by playing the most recent WOW expansion. There is no automated procedural way to create quests of that quality.
Until you're educated you can't hold an educated conversation on the topic.
What does tiny bit of WoW content have to do with how practical it is to have average quest replaced with similar procedurally generated quest?
What does tiny bit of WoW content have to do with how practical it is to have average quest replaced with similar procedurally generated quest?
Because you're making inaccurate statements like claiming the vast majority of quests are low quality. When everything is hand-made and has a place within its hub story arc within the zone story arc within the expansion story arc, then that's just not something a procedural quest will do as well -- given equal dev time and skill.
It's easier to piece that all together by hand once than to try to create a system that pieces those types of things together automatically.
That ease is why hand-made quests are of higher quality. With the same effort, the result is superior.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You limit the potential of procedural quests to a fragment of it's sum mechanics and of course it won't work.
Procedural content systems aren't about pitching a dumb database pulling content blindly together. There's such a thing as a AI storyteller for a reason there, and you can build overarching frameworks that procedural content is dropped into with bytes of necessary information or connecting elements to create story arcs all the same.
Your claim that "it's easier to piece that all together by hand once" isn't even a factual statement. The reality is that such a thing is dependent on volume and scope of the game content. The more quests you have to make and the longer the story arcs the more said content development compounds until you rapidly hit the threshold where a procedural system taking you 500 man hours is going to result in more quests of the same quality than said 500 man hours of hand-crafted content is capable of producing.
It's a trade-off on many levels between what the scale of the game you are producing is going to need.
The "ease" you refer to with the "hand-made" content you're talking about is because, as noted prior, a lot of that content you are talking about which has been slotted into those story arcs are actually already done in an assembly-line method of stringing basic quest components together and then adding some fluff. The reason any hand is still participant in that process is because the content pipeline would have to be entirely re-engineered if they wanted to automate it.
It's the fact that they have invested so much into the "hand-made" quest process int he past as to why they are still producing it now. They aren't going to completely rebuild how a ten year old MMO works at a fundamental level and how their content is implemented just for the quests being more readily produced through automation. They lost their window of that being the cost effective choice long ago so they are continuing with the pipeline they have already sunk all their money into.
Otherwise, you are talking about a content generation pipeline that can have zombies effectively running the bulk of it. Those quest chains you applaud had an algorithm to define their design long before any hand touched them to fill them put. That same algorithm is the fundamental of an AI storyteller and procedural content generation system, and more than capable of producing such story arcs if you'd cared to look through any of the prior offered links to such tools or dialogue on said technology.
It is honestly bizarre the ironic level of dissonance you have between the signature you choose to use and the dialogue you choose to write. Just because you believe your opinions the truth, that does not render reality false.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Comments
Have you heard that there are seven basic stories in the world? That's it. Google around everybody.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
For example, some people hold the opinion that climate change isn't happening. Others hold the opinion (based on the evidence) that it is happening. The deniers' opinions are simply wrong -- having an opinion that climate change isn't happening doesn't magically change reality.
So don't act like you don't need evidence. You do.
What evidence do you need? Games where procedural quests are visibly superior to hand-made quests.
Your shoe analogy is great because it specifically mentions how industrialization has produced a higher quantity of shoes, but not necessarily a higher quality of shoes. (Remember we're discussing quality.)
Your shoe analogy isn't perfect, because the shoe-maker doesn't make one pair of shoes that's sold to everyone. The game programmer does do that with their product. Games are a shared product. The programming team is going to create one game for millions of players, so the focus is on quality not quantity.
A real-life shared product would make a better analogy for the purposes of our discussion. Like a government building. Capitol buildings aren't churned out of factories, they're 'hand-made' one-off construction projects focused on quality (which in this case is a measure of both building longevity and the ability to efficiently facilitate government meetings). And so capitols are constructed of superior materials and with layouts that facilitate those large discussions.
Look if all you're saying is eventually (in 2040 or whenever) the Singularity will occur and one output of that will be AI that creates better art than humans, then sure I'd agree that seems plausible. But in the context of 2016 with current game-making technology there is no evidence that it makes sense to pursue that method today.
Your list of quests again is an oversimplification which ignores the details that produce superior quests. Yes, if you ignore everything that contributes to quality then "why not mass-produce it in a factory?" might seem like a reasonable question. But how about we don't ignore storyline, presentation, and hand-made mechanic choices and realize that both of these things are critical to good quest design?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Again you ignore that most people creating shoes are not master shoe makers and most shoes produced are not master level. This why mass production of shoes make sense because the quality is high at this point. This is where quest are in this genre are because its not really practical to sit there and craft masterful quest after quest. Money and time are big factors. Not to mention talent lacking by many developers. This is why you have filler quest to give players things to do.
That is why procedural questing is very practical. At its basic level it can produce filler quest level quest. You can mass produce them, you can personalize them and do not require static content like developer content. This is already possible not something you have to wait until 2040. Creating a system that can create personalized average content goes a long way. Having a quest just for me goes further than heavily scripted content that's on youtube or 20 guys next to me are doing the same thing. Its a quality of its own to do a decent quest that is one of one. Not to mention if I want a heavily scripted instanced quest I just as well play single player game.
It may not be intentional confirmation bias, but once you've deigned to take a stance based on incomplete information and reject any new information that may change your opinion, you've already forfeited any claim to a rational argument on the matter.
An unfamiliarity with technology is not an excuse to ignore said technology or pretend it does not exist.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
On the other hand I have to not only give evidence that my subjective opinion is right, I can't use logical theory of practical use . I can't say that system delivery and content creation is based on the quality of the creator. Showing the average MMORPG quest could be procedurally created not addressed. Ignore positives outside of pure story being flexibility, quanity and personalize the story.
So basically its WoW's best quest prove that his opinion is correct based on the fact that WoW's best quest are the best.
In multiplayer games I always prefer a virtual world with lots of paths to take. Watching others and my own experiences shape the world can also be a great story.
If you simply prefer procedural quests, that's fine.
But the discussion has been around the objective quality (and resulting success) of each quest method; the points made about how hand-made quest systems are superior revolve around the logic that with an identical number of dev-hours and dev skill, procedural quest systems produce lower quality, and the lack of evidence of procedural-quest-driven games being equal or higher quality to hand-made quest systems.
Why are you replying to a post that explicitly invalidated the shoe-maker analogy? It just means your response is countered before it's even typed out. Games are shared products, they aren't shoes where mass-production is required to produce shoes (individual products) for everyone. It simply doesn't matter if 80% of construction companies are crap, because the capitol-building contract will go to the one best construction company and the time and money will be spent ensuring it's a very high quality product -- it should be, because it's a shared public building and so it wouldn't make sense to churn those buildings out with a low-quality high-capacity company.
The majority of quests in WOW are mini-arcs within larger story arcs within giant xpack story arcs. For example I was playing up my mage yesterday in Talador and followed the arc of securing the area from Iron Horde while building up my presence there, which included smaller arcs of an offensive commanded by Durotan/Gazlowe where you use Gazlowe's gadgetry and engineering expertise to beat them back. If your definition of "filler" is "anything that's not the Final End Boss" then yeah there's a lot of filler. But in reality I think every single quest I did over the weekend fit into the larger storyline, and therefore wasn't filler.
Procedural quests aren't "practical" except for bargain-bin MMORPGs that have no interest in providing engaging content. If you want to recreate the meaningless missions of Anarchy Online that just churned out a little bonus XP for going to some randomized place, then sure you can quickly produce a low-quality game to do that. But the state of the art for MMORPG design is way higher than that currently and by producing content of that quality you're going to create a game nobody really wants to play. MMORPG players simply aren't seeking lower-quality MMORPGs than currently exist.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The discussion has been around the capability of the technology and how it can be applied. You didn't like that conversation so you made up a different one.
We've already gone over how procedural content with a director AI can utilize story arc mechanics to build logical frameworks for events, draw on actors from the game world to make at least semi-permanent elements, and even use the tracking of player activities to create more tailored and context sensitive events to not just deliver an interesting story, but a personal one.
Such technology doesn't come out of the aether, and you can only pick away at the same old technology so long before you hit a brick wall. Honestly, we hit that a long time ago with the "hand crafted linear" structure and we already know it's a sub-par fit for a multi-user and especially massive-user world because it forces many undesirable elements (static game world, lack of meaningful decisions to the greater community, the "everyone is the chosen one" problem, etc). Progress needs to be made if we want a MMO that delivers on a better game world at this point.
Vouch for stagnation as much as you want axe, but there are others that want progress.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
By the way, WoW is full of filler quest. WoW literally invented filler quest sheesh. Maybe in this expansion you see you're Blizzard fanboy level of quest but how many game companies make as much as WoW to make multi-million dollar expansions and make tons off it? How many western developers are investing huge sums to make a new MMORPG with 100% epic questing? Even Bioware's SWTOR is full of simplistic task hidden behind voiceovers and cut scenes.
Practical because in the new era for Western MMORPG its going to be lower budget. They're going to have to rely on what the format's strength is player centric. Making generic quest that are flexible, automated and non-static goes a long way. This allows you to have sandbox and competent non static personal content. It also allows you to focus on themepark areas to be high quality.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
The "bottom 80%" definition represents a deliberate ignorance of quality. If you're unwilling or unable to recognize that factors like gameplay, story, and visuals are all involved in the perceived quality of a quest, then you're not equipped to discuss this topic.
So if we're discussing quality, and we are, then we must admit that many WOW quests (and the vast majority of lvl 70+ quests) are high-quality due to how they fit their narrative, offer varied gameplay, and (especially 90+) take place more in the game world than as a simple text-box.
But again, this is a comparative discussion. It doesn't matter where the 'average player rating' of a WOW quest falls -- what matters is that that average rating would be higher than if Blizzard (with their same dev skill) had implemented a procedural quest system instead. Hand-made quests are higher quality than procedural quests.
The comparison matters because -- high budget or low -- a company wants to be efficient. Procedural quests are not the best bang for your buck. Hand-made quests are.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Beyond that you just repeated the conjecture that is your opinion of "custom built quests are better" without any kind of supporting logic.
If a game had 100% custom quest content where the majority wasn't quickly assembled progression tasks, you might have had a point. Not even WoW does that though because there is an aspect of efficiency you forgot about. Making "hand made" content that is high-quality costs a good amount of money. Every sequence, every animation, every audio line and soundtrack, every asset of a "quality" quest being tailored is an additional cost above the norm. It is not giving you the best "bang for your buck" to see all the quests built that way because you will quickly see your operating budget balloon to silly proportions if you attempt it.
Like the reality of WoW is that even a majority of their new and endgame quests are not up to such a standard. Most of them are, in reality, still a short dialogue interaction between running to another point to repeat one of a select few activities. The only difference between that content and a prodecurally generated quest is that a human slapped the components together instead of a machine, but the resulting quality of the content is functionally the same at that level.
If you want to get higher quality out of a procedural system there's already been methods explained of how you can do that and tech to do it with.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Until you're educated you can't hold an educated conversation on the topic.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Is there a point at which you are willing to toss out broken records when you realize they no longer work, or are you really that adamant that your opinions are that far above reality that facts are no longer important?
Talk about pot calling the kettle black with that education statement.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
It's easier to piece that all together by hand once than to try to create a system that pieces those types of things together automatically.
That ease is why hand-made quests are of higher quality. With the same effort, the result is superior.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You limit the potential of procedural quests to a fragment of it's sum mechanics and of course it won't work.
Procedural content systems aren't about pitching a dumb database pulling content blindly together. There's such a thing as a AI storyteller for a reason there, and you can build overarching frameworks that procedural content is dropped into with bytes of necessary information or connecting elements to create story arcs all the same.
Your claim that "it's easier to piece that all together by hand once" isn't even a factual statement. The reality is that such a thing is dependent on volume and scope of the game content. The more quests you have to make and the longer the story arcs the more said content development compounds until you rapidly hit the threshold where a procedural system taking you 500 man hours is going to result in more quests of the same quality than said 500 man hours of hand-crafted content is capable of producing.
It's a trade-off on many levels between what the scale of the game you are producing is going to need.
The "ease" you refer to with the "hand-made" content you're talking about is because, as noted prior, a lot of that content you are talking about which has been slotted into those story arcs are actually already done in an assembly-line method of stringing basic quest components together and then adding some fluff. The reason any hand is still participant in that process is because the content pipeline would have to be entirely re-engineered if they wanted to automate it.
It's the fact that they have invested so much into the "hand-made" quest process int he past as to why they are still producing it now. They aren't going to completely rebuild how a ten year old MMO works at a fundamental level and how their content is implemented just for the quests being more readily produced through automation. They lost their window of that being the cost effective choice long ago so they are continuing with the pipeline they have already sunk all their money into.
Otherwise, you are talking about a content generation pipeline that can have zombies effectively running the bulk of it. Those quest chains you applaud had an algorithm to define their design long before any hand touched them to fill them put. That same algorithm is the fundamental of an AI storyteller and procedural content generation system, and more than capable of producing such story arcs if you'd cared to look through any of the prior offered links to such tools or dialogue on said technology.
It is honestly bizarre the ironic level of dissonance you have between the signature you choose to use and the dialogue you choose to write. Just because you believe your opinions the truth, that does not render reality false.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin