The developmental irony is that it is more difficult to create an engaging game with less prefabricated content than it is to create a game with more prefabricated content.
...is it? Where did you get that from?
LOL.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
The developmental irony is that it is more difficult to create an engaging game with less prefabricated content than it is to create a game with more prefabricated content.
...is it? Where did you get that from?
LOL.
I guess he doesn't know about copy and paste?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
The majority of pvpers who want to fight worthy opponents instead of ganking lowbies these days play games where the concept of "lowbie" doesn't exist. MOBAs, Battle Royales, etc.
I am not sure what you are trying to imply there.
Did you happen to try to make an impression that you are such an ignorant halfwit to believe making a "mainstream" game is like copy and paste functionality?
Ah yes... When logic and actual debate fail, go to personal attacks. Must have struck a nerve...
It doesn't take even a half-wit like me to know that copying content then pasting it in different areas is much easier than trying to make an actual, engaging game. But, who knows what goes on in that giggly muscle between your ears, eh?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I only like using the letters mmorpg because any other label given to these games is not fully accurate. So i want a fully fledged realistic/plausible,good looking,good mechanics,world building and good AI. I do not want to chase markers over npc heads...EVER,that was acceptable back in the mmorpg design infancy but we should be well beyond that point by now.
Survival games gives a far better platform but lack the overall content.So what i would like to see is a HQ survival game with scripted events and more tools to support living in a world.Yes it is ok and i prefer some interaction with npc's,just nothing with hand holding and VERY few of those fetch me quests,i want to interact like i would within the LORE of the game,be it magical/fantasy or more modern realism,either way doesn't matter.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I only like using the letters mmorpg because any other label given to these games is not fully accurate. So i want a fully fledged realistic/plausible,good looking,good mechanics,world building and good AI. I do not want to chase markers over npc heads...EVER,that was acceptable back in the mmorpg design infancy but we should be well beyond that point by now.
Survival games gives a far better platform but lack the overall content.So what i would like to see is a HQ survival game with scripted events and more tools to support living in a world.Yes it is ok and i prefer some interaction with npc's,just nothing with hand holding and VERY few of those fetch me quests,i want to interact like i would within the LORE of the game,be it magical/fantasy or more modern realism,either way doesn't matter.
I think persistent online world fits more so. That fits the orginal group of games and to me what truly separates CoD from Planetside.
When I think of MMORPG it always start with the world. I would not consider a 10000k deathmatch FPS a MMOFPS. I would consider a 1000 player server persistent world that is FPS a MMOFPS.
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
since we are talking about pvp i'll bud in... another mechanic to tackle the ffa pvp dilemma are pvp tags letting players to tag themselves for a pvp role in the world that defines who they can and cannot attack: bandit, guard, merchant, murderer, bounty hunter etc
of course some tags should have to be forced on players for some actions for example for transporting goods you get the merchant tag etc and if you tag yourself as a murderer and use the tag to randomly kill, that should be a one way ticket to permadeath...
but the biggest design decision will always remain imo: will you allow murderers to attack anyone indiscriminately... or create tagless players and if you create these tagless PVE players what would their role in the world be... what would they contribute to the game...
just some of my thoughts on open world pvp...
Talking about games where thousands of players exist simultaneously in a single instance and mechanics related to such games.
since we are talking about pvp i'll bud in... another mechanic to tackle the ffa pvp dilemma are pvp tags letting players to tag themselves for a pvp role in the world that defines who they can and cannot attack: bandit, guard, merchant, murderer, bounty hunter etc
of course some tags should have to be forced on players for some actions for example for transporting goods you get the merchant tag etc and if you tag yourself as a murderer and use the tag to randomly kill, that should be a one way ticket to permadeath...
but the biggest design decision will always remain imo: will you allow murderers to attack anyone indiscriminately... or create tagless players and if you create these tagless PVE players what would their role in the world be... what would they contribute to the game...
just some of my thoughts on open world pvp...
You start from the end - the current mechanisms. Again L2 and Albion - in the first you have experience loss, in the second - full loot. Which is more harsh? The answer is L2, as you need more time to get the experience. But full loot obviously sounds harder. Actually there are not murders, loot and etc. - everything is about the time loss and the time need. So the risk/reward ratio. But these are the mechanisms of the play. They change and they are rebalanced constantly.
The core of the game are the goals and the tools. So why you play, and how to reach your goals. To call a game multiplayer, it shall have multiplayer goals, and tools. To make a game about solo progression and then to say: now let FFA PvP - is obvious recipe for failure. But that is exactly what most developers do.
Like you said, it's not about solo mechanics, but each player controls an individual avatar. If you let players throw shit at each other, they will. That's why ffa pvp games fail. Many people come to ffa pvp games to gank noobs because it makes them feel good. I'm not interested in that kind of gameplay. That's the failure to me.
Talking about games where thousands of players exist simultaneously in a single instance and mechanics related to such games.
since we are talking about pvp i'll bud in... another mechanic to tackle the ffa pvp dilemma are pvp tags letting players to tag themselves for a pvp role in the world that defines who they can and cannot attack: bandit, guard, merchant, murderer, bounty hunter etc
of course some tags should have to be forced on players for some actions for example for transporting goods you get the merchant tag etc and if you tag yourself as a murderer and use the tag to randomly kill, that should be a one way ticket to permadeath...
but the biggest design decision will always remain imo: will you allow murderers to attack anyone indiscriminately... or create tagless players and if you create these tagless PVE players what would their role in the world be... what would they contribute to the game...
just some of my thoughts on open world pvp...
You start from the end - the current mechanisms. Again L2 and Albion - in the first you have experience loss, in the second - full loot. Which is more harsh? The answer is L2, as you need more time to get the experience. But full loot obviously sounds harder. Actually there are not murders, loot and etc. -
Went into Lineage 2 Classic NA few weeks ago. It's dumbed down a lot. Like, instant lvl 20. So I grinded a bit for nostalgia, got eventually dual sls for free (lol). So I went to abandoned camp. There was some wannabe sword singer, with karma, and real bow of peril.
My and my buddy killed him. He dropped the bow. We now have millions of adena.
Like you said, it's not about solo mechanics, but each player controls an individual avatar. If you let players throw shit at each other, they will. That's why ffa pvp games fail. Many people come to ffa pvp games to gank noobs because it makes them feel good. I'm not interested in that kind of gameplay. That's the failure to me.
No. You assume ganking noobs is a thing. It is not. Let take Albion again. A full loot game. Do players gank noobs? Yes. But these who do that are mainly noobs. The experienced player, at least the majority will not attack a newbie player, as there will not be loot. And this is a game, where the ganking is meaningful and rewarding. And with proper risk/reward ratio - higher players you attack, higher rewards you could get.
And let see Tera. A game where players really gank noobs for nothing. Also L2. There they gank, when they are bored. And they get nothing as reward and nothing as challenge.
So the problem is not the ganking itself. It is how the goals and the tools for FFA PvP are implemented.
People do not come in games to gank noobs. At least the majority. They do it when they have nothing else to do. As with ganking they will lose time for progression or other goals. It is - my game is boring, let ruin your game. But when the ganking is properly implemented like in Albion or EVE, it is actually fun for all. Again - goals and tools.
Here we go. You say I assume ganking noobs is a thing and then you say it's not a thing. And then you go on to explain how ganking noobs is a thing in many games. Just make a little effort, please.
Talking about games where thousands of players exist simultaneously in a single instance and mechanics related to such games.
Comments
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
It doesn't take even a half-wit like me to know that copying content then pasting it in different areas is much easier than trying to make an actual, engaging game. But, who knows what goes on in that giggly muscle between your ears, eh?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
So i want a fully fledged realistic/plausible,good looking,good mechanics,world building and good AI.
I do not want to chase markers over npc heads...EVER,that was acceptable back in the mmorpg design infancy but we should be well beyond that point by now.
Survival games gives a far better platform but lack the overall content.So what i would like to see is a HQ survival game with scripted events and more tools to support living in a world.Yes it is ok and i prefer some interaction with npc's,just nothing with hand holding and VERY few of those fetch me quests,i want to interact like i would within the LORE of the game,be it magical/fantasy or more modern realism,either way doesn't matter.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
When I think of MMORPG it always start with the world. I would not consider a 10000k deathmatch FPS a MMOFPS. I would consider a 1000 player server persistent world that is FPS a MMOFPS.
Yeah, tell me more about logic failing...
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
another mechanic to tackle the ffa pvp dilemma are pvp tags
letting players to tag themselves for a pvp role in the world that defines who they can and cannot attack: bandit, guard, merchant, murderer, bounty hunter etc
of course some tags should have to be forced on players for some actions for example for transporting goods you get the merchant tag etc
and if you tag yourself as a murderer and use the tag to randomly kill, that should be a one way ticket to permadeath...
but the biggest design decision will always remain imo: will you allow murderers to attack anyone indiscriminately... or create tagless players and if you create these tagless PVE players what would their role in the world be... what would they contribute to the game...
just some of my thoughts on open world pvp...
My and my buddy killed him. He dropped the bow. We now have millions of adena.
Fun times.