Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Interview: Creator Of Ultima Online's Next MMO Leverages Blockchain and NFTs To Allow For Real Owner

1234568»

Comments

  • TheDalaiBombaTheDalaiBomba Member EpicPosts: 1,493
    lahnmir said:
    Iselin said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Iselin said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Binding stuff to player accounts may be one of the worst developments in gaming since chess was invented.
    Said every wallet warrior ever.
    I'm sure I don't know what you mean.

    I like things to be earned in game and flow through the game in a realistic manner. Having a game world where the "Legendary Sword of Ratmen" suddenly has to be trashed because someone equipped it first is idiotic, immersion breaking, and did I say idiotic?

    This is just another case of breaking immersion for the sake of a stupid store.


    The reason that games use bind on pick up to character or account is to make sure you need to do the content to have that item.

    If they don't, anyone with enough gold can get the item without doing the content. And that is the basic definition of a wallet warrior whether it's done with in game gold or cash or both.

    Idiotic to me is buying your way into game power or making piles of gold catering to those who do.
    Why not mark the PERSON and not the item?

    If you lift up the Dragontooth Sword without having had its blood spattered on you, it burns the weirder for x damage per second.

    If you try to wear the Armor of Mist without having seen the Wylde Witch and taken her Ointment… then you are blinded and cannot see unit it is removed.

    Lots of better always to approach this IMHO.   
    I would go one step further even and make all gear the same as consumables, when its durability reaches zero it is gone. What you could however gain permanently from certain dungeons/encounters/achievements would be specific skills or passives. This way you could have a healthy economy where nothing is 'forever' and finetune/expand a character through actual gameplay. It would also allow for expansions to skip the power bloat altogether and simply introduce more options to play with.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    I'd like to play an MMORPG where accounts are locked to one character per account, accounts had to be unique IDs, and they used a system like this one or the ole "dungeons drop magical crafting ingredients only, you pay a crafter to turn those into epic gear, use it until it degrades and breaks, rinse repeat."

    I'd be interested in the economy of such a game.  It seems like it would be a far easier beast to manage and tune.  I feel like it would do a better job of encouraging more positive player behavior and interaction than what we have now.
    Mendel
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,975
    lahnmir said:
    Iselin said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Iselin said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Binding stuff to player accounts may be one of the worst developments in gaming since chess was invented.
    Said every wallet warrior ever.
    I'm sure I don't know what you mean.

    I like things to be earned in game and flow through the game in a realistic manner. Having a game world where the "Legendary Sword of Ratmen" suddenly has to be trashed because someone equipped it first is idiotic, immersion breaking, and did I say idiotic?

    This is just another case of breaking immersion for the sake of a stupid store.


    The reason that games use bind on pick up to character or account is to make sure you need to do the content to have that item.

    If they don't, anyone with enough gold can get the item without doing the content. And that is the basic definition of a wallet warrior whether it's done with in game gold or cash or both.

    Idiotic to me is buying your way into game power or making piles of gold catering to those who do.
    Why not mark the PERSON and not the item?

    If you lift up the Dragontooth Sword without having had its blood spattered on you, it burns the weirder for x damage per second.

    If you try to wear the Armor of Mist without having seen the Wylde Witch and taken her Ointment… then you are blinded and cannot see unit it is removed.

    Lots of better always to approach this IMHO.   
    I would go one step further even and make all gear the same as consumables, when its durability reaches zero it is gone. What you could however gain permanently from certain dungeons/encounters/achievements would be specific skills or passives. This way you could have a healthy economy where nothing is 'forever' and finetune/expand a character through actual gameplay. It would also allow for expansions to skip the power bloat altogether and simply introduce more options to play with.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    I'd like to play an MMORPG where accounts are locked to one character per account, accounts had to be unique IDs, and they used a system like this one or the ole "dungeons drop magical crafting ingredients only, you pay a crafter to turn those into epic gear, use it until it degrades and breaks, rinse repeat."

    I'd be interested in the economy of such a game.  It seems like it would be a far easier beast to manage and tune.  I feel like it would do a better job of encouraging more positive player behavior and interaction than what we have now.
    But the real question is would such changes encourage customers to spend more money?  If not, can't see such ideas being entertained by Developers.

    TheDalaiBomba

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,780
    Iselin said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Iselin said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Binding stuff to player accounts may be one of the worst developments in gaming since chess was invented.
    Said every wallet warrior ever.
    I'm sure I don't know what you mean.

    I like things to be earned in game and flow through the game in a realistic manner. Having a game world where the "Legendary Sword of Ratmen" suddenly has to be trashed because someone equipped it first is idiotic, immersion breaking, and did I say idiotic?

    This is just another case of breaking immersion for the sake of a stupid store.


    The reason that games use bind on pick up to character or account is to make sure you need to do the content to have that item.

    If they don't, anyone with enough gold can get the item without doing the content. And that is the basic definition of a wallet warrior whether it's done with in game gold or cash or both.

    Idiotic to me is buying your way into game power or making piles of gold catering to those who do.
    Why not mark the PERSON and not the item?

    If you lift up the Dragontooth Sword without having had its blood spattered on you, it burns the weirder for x damage per second.

    If you try to wear the Armor of Mist without having seen the Wylde Witch and taken her Ointment… then you are blinded and cannot see unit it is removed.

    Lots of better always to approach this IMHO.   
    I like this!

    I'm not sure it would be a lot of development effort if the game had something built in  like "curses"

    Games already have debuffs so if x hasn't happened then y debuff will happen.


    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • TheDalaiBombaTheDalaiBomba Member EpicPosts: 1,493
    Kyleran said:
    lahnmir said:
    Iselin said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Iselin said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Binding stuff to player accounts may be one of the worst developments in gaming since chess was invented.
    Said every wallet warrior ever.
    I'm sure I don't know what you mean.

    I like things to be earned in game and flow through the game in a realistic manner. Having a game world where the "Legendary Sword of Ratmen" suddenly has to be trashed because someone equipped it first is idiotic, immersion breaking, and did I say idiotic?

    This is just another case of breaking immersion for the sake of a stupid store.


    The reason that games use bind on pick up to character or account is to make sure you need to do the content to have that item.

    If they don't, anyone with enough gold can get the item without doing the content. And that is the basic definition of a wallet warrior whether it's done with in game gold or cash or both.

    Idiotic to me is buying your way into game power or making piles of gold catering to those who do.
    Why not mark the PERSON and not the item?

    If you lift up the Dragontooth Sword without having had its blood spattered on you, it burns the weirder for x damage per second.

    If you try to wear the Armor of Mist without having seen the Wylde Witch and taken her Ointment… then you are blinded and cannot see unit it is removed.

    Lots of better always to approach this IMHO.   
    I would go one step further even and make all gear the same as consumables, when its durability reaches zero it is gone. What you could however gain permanently from certain dungeons/encounters/achievements would be specific skills or passives. This way you could have a healthy economy where nothing is 'forever' and finetune/expand a character through actual gameplay. It would also allow for expansions to skip the power bloat altogether and simply introduce more options to play with.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    I'd like to play an MMORPG where accounts are locked to one character per account, accounts had to be unique IDs, and they used a system like this one or the ole "dungeons drop magical crafting ingredients only, you pay a crafter to turn those into epic gear, use it until it degrades and breaks, rinse repeat."

    I'd be interested in the economy of such a game.  It seems like it would be a far easier beast to manage and tune.  I feel like it would do a better job of encouraging more positive player behavior and interaction than what we have now.
    But the real question is would such changes encourage customers to spend more money?  If not, can't see such ideas being entertained by Developers.

    You are right.  It would truly have to be a passion project for both the developers and the investors.  I don't think this particular point in time in the industry is a conducive to producing such a project.  Crowdfunding was an attempt, and we saw how that turned out for MMORPGs.
    Kyleran
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,273
    edited April 2022
    lahnmir said:
    Iselin said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Iselin said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Binding stuff to player accounts may be one of the worst developments in gaming since chess was invented.
    Said every wallet warrior ever.
    I'm sure I don't know what you mean.

    I like things to be earned in game and flow through the game in a realistic manner. Having a game world where the "Legendary Sword of Ratmen" suddenly has to be trashed because someone equipped it first is idiotic, immersion breaking, and did I say idiotic?

    This is just another case of breaking immersion for the sake of a stupid store.


    The reason that games use bind on pick up to character or account is to make sure you need to do the content to have that item.

    If they don't, anyone with enough gold can get the item without doing the content. And that is the basic definition of a wallet warrior whether it's done with in game gold or cash or both.

    Idiotic to me is buying your way into game power or making piles of gold catering to those who do.
    Why not mark the PERSON and not the item?

    If you lift up the Dragontooth Sword without having had its blood spattered on you, it burns the weirder for x damage per second.

    If you try to wear the Armor of Mist without having seen the Wylde Witch and taken her Ointment… then you are blinded and cannot see unit it is removed.

    Lots of better always to approach this IMHO.   
    I would go one step further even and make all gear the same as consumables, when its durability reaches zero it is gone. What you could however gain permanently from certain dungeons/encounters/achievements would be specific skills or passives. This way you could have a healthy economy where nothing is 'forever' and finetune/expand a character through actual gameplay. It would also allow for expansions to skip the power bloat altogether and simply introduce more options to play with.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    It is hard to create the illusion of digital ownership that studios like to foster when items degrade and become useless. I think this could be the main reason why we see so few MMOs with degradable items now.

    Look at NFT's, they want to push that illusion even further and make you pay more for it.
    [Deleted User]
  • NildenNilden Member EpicPosts: 3,916
    Kyleran said:

    But the real question is would such changes encourage customers to spend more money?  If not, can't see such ideas being entertained by Developers.

    It's so money focused and driven at this point the creator of Ultima announces a new game and we get NFT's and blockchain before they even have a name for the game.
    Iselin

    "You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon

    "classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon

    Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer

    Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/ 

Sign In or Register to comment.