Less talk, more walk. Let's make a game.

Kilrain

Is there anyone here who has any capacity to develop a game? 
Programming experience, 2d/3d art, writing (not game design), audio?

Do you have free time and are willing to put in some work to make a game?

I've been in the business for a number of years in programming as well as 2d and 3d art, I'm just not real fast with the art side of things, but I can do it. I would like to create something akin to Valheim in UE5. I also have a server structure capable of MMO numbers, single server, seamless world, etc, but that would only be something I would consider if the game itself became something good enough and could "handle" a large number of players.

This is not an advertisement for a job. I'm not looking to hire anyone. I'm looking for like minded folks that would like to team up and actually build something instead of sitting on here complaining about other peoples games   

Anyway, if you're interested let me know here or in a DM. If you just want to bullshit about how the game could work that's fine too, why not.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

mekhere

Kilrain said:

Is there anyone here who has any capacity to develop a game? 
Programming experience, 2d/3d art, writing (not game design), audio?

Do you have free time and are willing to put in some work to make a game?

I've been in the business for a number of years in programming as well as 2d and 3d art, I'm just not real fast with the art side of things, but I can do it. I would like to create something akin to Valheim in UE5. I also have a server structure capable of MMO numbers, single server, seamless world, etc, but that would only be something I would consider if the game itself became something good enough and could "handle" a large number of players.

This is not an advertisement for a job. I'm not looking to hire anyone. I'm looking for like minded folks that would like to team up and actually build something instead of sitting on here complaining about other peoples games   

Anyway, if you're interested let me know here or in a DM. If you just want to bullshit about how the game could work that's fine too, why not.

Your First Game In Unreal Engine 5 | Epic Developer Community (epicgames.com)
This is the best game engine for game development. It is also the easiest. Happy developing!

What are you trying to make? Space, military, goth, fantasy, strategy, or racing?
Console, PC, or mobile platform?
PvP or PvE or both?
FPS?

Scot

ikcin said:

Deathkon1 said:

ikcin said:

First you need several million USD or EUR. Also to hire server for MMO is ridiculously cheap. This is not a significant expense, except if the server is very special, like that of EVE. That is why Amazon could deal so easy with that initial nonsense of NW. You can create mechanically working game for several months with few people. To make marketable product you will need several years and real team. Also the issue with the games is not coding. You can outsource the entire work if you know what you want, and you have money, both. If you don't, you cannot make a game. 

Star citizen has half a a billion dollars and even that wasn't enough because its still not done and riddled with bugs, so you need hire an actual team  of competent people and when I say team I mean more then 1-3, so 20-40 people max.

Star citizen is example for incompetent management. Take Gloria Victis, they made a MMO for less than a million. Initially it started with few people coding in their free time. But they were unbale to finish the project. Then it was acquired by Black Eye Games, and done. The game has some good ideas, but for me personally factions ruin it. As there are very few games where factions and guilds work well - DAOC is the only example I can point. And in general even there are issues. Guilds are the core of any MMORPG. If guilds are pointless, the MMO part is pointless.

The truth as is so often the case lies between these extremes, you are going to be lucky to make a great game with less than a million but it can be done. You are going to have to be unlucky to make a poor game with 500 million but it can be done. That "luck" can include good and bad management, but we have seen strong studios with solid track records still make a less than great game. It is not down to one factor like money or management, but a combination of many and that's where the luck comes in.

Dibdabs

ikcin said:...If guilds are pointless, the MMO part is pointless.

So many guild are absolute shit though, which has rendered the very concept of guilds to be of no relevance to me and probably a fair number of other players.  There will be good ones, there will be outstanding ones, but I can't be arsed to wade through all the guilds in a game to find a decent one.  A game with no provision for guilds whatsoever would make me more inclined to consider buying it.

Mendel

Scot said:

ikcin said:

Deathkon1 said:

ikcin said:

First you need several million USD or EUR. Also to hire server for MMO is ridiculously cheap. This is not a significant expense, except if the server is very special, like that of EVE. That is why Amazon could deal so easy with that initial nonsense of NW. You can create mechanically working game for several months with few people. To make marketable product you will need several years and real team. Also the issue with the games is not coding. You can outsource the entire work if you know what you want, and you have money, both. If you don't, you cannot make a game. 

Star citizen has half a a billion dollars and even that wasn't enough because its still not done and riddled with bugs, so you need hire an actual team  of competent people and when I say team I mean more then 1-3, so 20-40 people max.

Star citizen is example for incompetent management. Take Gloria Victis, they made a MMO for less than a million. Initially it started with few people coding in their free time. But they were unbale to finish the project. Then it was acquired by Black Eye Games, and done. The game has some good ideas, but for me personally factions ruin it. As there are very few games where factions and guilds work well - DAOC is the only example I can point. And in general even there are issues. Guilds are the core of any MMORPG. If guilds are pointless, the MMO part is pointless.

The truth as is so often the case lies between these extremes, you are going to be lucky to make a great game with less than a million but it can be done. You are going to have to be unlucky to make a poor game with 500 million but it can be done. That "luck" can include good and bad management, but we have seen strong studios with solid track records still make a less than great game. It is not down to one factor like money or management, but a combination of many and that's where the luck comes in.

While I agree, especially about the many factors part, a lot of what I see are choices, not luck.  How many games have come around with the full loot, open world PvP when it has been shown than PvE is generally better revenue potential, especially in the MMORPG space.  All too many games are saddled with questionable management that continuously makes bad choices.  Even more of them want to 'double down' with their bad ideas.  The results are all too frequently bad games with questionable monetization that have issues with scheduling and project management.

kitarad

These are some of the full loot open PvP games on Steam. Their populations are pitiful examples of why these games do so badly.

Last Oasis   https://steamcharts.com/app/903950

Wild Terra Online 1 https://steamcharts.com/app/500710

The first did so well they decided to make a second Wild Terra Online   https://steamcharts.com/app/1134700

Mortal Online 2 is doing better than the ones above but still hardly profitable.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1170950

Legends of Aria https://steamcharts.com/app/594770

I think Albion Online and EvE are the exceptions. 

 New World is doing much better because players have the choice to PvP or not.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1063730

Uwakionna

ikcin said:

kitarad said:

These are some of the full loot open PvP games on Steam. Their populations are pitiful examples of why these games do so badly.

Last Oasis   https://steamcharts.com/app/903950

Wild Terra Online 1 https://steamcharts.com/app/500710

The first did so well they decided to make a second Wild Terra Online   https://steamcharts.com/app/1134700

Mortal Online 2 is doing better than the ones above but still hardly profitable.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1170950

Legends of Aria https://steamcharts.com/app/594770

I think Albion Online and EvE are the exceptions. 

 New World is doing much better because players have the choice to PvP or not.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1063730

LoL, Fortnite, Valorant, CoD, CS - these are the most watched and most streamed games. What you do here is to use part of reality to create delusion. The fact most MMORPGs have lame PvP does not make PvP bad feature, it makes most MMORPGs bad games.

What it means is the features driving PvP in MMOs is flawed, yes.
Namely, the open world and full loot features. It appeals to a very limited niche overall, which means very limited success overall.

And when you talk about the success of PvP games elsewhere, you demonstrate this by listing off titles that offer a very different format of PvP with lobbies, fixed player counts, and very limited scaling progression (versus horizontal and cosmetic unlocks).

Brainy

People dont want to farm for 1k hours and lose all thier gear to some gank team.

PVP full loot is popular in a different genre, namely one where the game world is not persistent, and if it is like Atlas/Ark then the items can be recrafted using blueprints that are generally safe.

But even in Ark/Atlas the devs gave up on Atlas and went back to making PVE expansions in Ark even though they didnt want too.  They figured out real fast where the real player base was coming from.  Lucky for them they had a game to go back too.

Other dev teams go all in with Full Loot PVP MMO's and just watch it crumble like Crowfall.

Even back in the old days when games like UO and DAOC were adding massive PVE content, full loot games like Shadowbane were shuting down.

Game devs keep redoing the exact same forumla thinking they will get a different result.

kitarad

ikcin said:

kitarad said:

These are some of the full loot open PvP games on Steam. Their populations are pitiful examples of why these games do so badly.

Last Oasis   https://steamcharts.com/app/903950

Wild Terra Online 1 https://steamcharts.com/app/500710

The first did so well they decided to make a second Wild Terra Online   https://steamcharts.com/app/1134700

Mortal Online 2 is doing better than the ones above but still hardly profitable.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1170950

Legends of Aria https://steamcharts.com/app/594770

I think Albion Online and EvE are the exceptions. 

 New World is doing much better because players have the choice to PvP or not.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1063730

LoL, Fortnite, Valorant, CoD, CS - these are the most watched and most streamed games. What you do here is to use part of reality to create delusion. The fact most MMORPGs have lame PvP does not make PvP bad feature, it makes most MMORPGs bad games.

LoL is a MOBA, Fortnite is a battle Royale. None of the games you used as examples are MMORPGs. No one here is saying PvP is unpopular. Try to understand that. You're completely blinded by your agenda that you cannot see why MMORPGs do not work when you have full loot , free for all PvP. These games cannot reach the numbers most games that separate PvP from PvE with zones achieve. This was a problem you had before and I to see you still cannot distinguish genres.

No one is arguing against PvP. That is your biggest problem you just cannot understand the argument because you're hell bent on doing things your way.

PvP is extremely popular in FPS lobby games, Battle Royales and MOBAs but they falter when coupled with progression type games that require huge investment for gear and progression. People generally do not want to lose items they spend a few months obtaining. Those types of games rely on people investing time in a gear treadmill and losing them in full loot PvP will not work. Use your head and notice the difference.

Albion Online from what I understand has gear that one can easily replace so losing it isn't a problem. The minute you try to take away some priced possession from a  player that invested a lot of time in getting it, you will lose that player. That is a play style that is incompatible with full loot PvP that can work with throwaway gear or insurance like Eve. Not all players enjoy the acquisition of throw away gear. They take pride in parading around with their epics and hard to obtain looks. You're just killing their interest in your game when you say someone can waltz in and take it away by killing them. Why would they spend the time to obtain these items when others can rob them of it.

Gear treadmills work on a philosophy that is completely divorced from throwaway gear that no one has a problem losing. This means no one is interested in investing time in the gear treadmill either which is fine because that is not the goal of the game. MMORPGs that are designed around the acquisition of gear does not work when that acquisition is threatened.

Scot

Mendel said:

Scot said:

ikcin said:

Deathkon1 said:

ikcin said:

First you need several million USD or EUR. Also to hire server for MMO is ridiculously cheap. This is not a significant expense, except if the server is very special, like that of EVE. That is why Amazon could deal so easy with that initial nonsense of NW. You can create mechanically working game for several months with few people. To make marketable product you will need several years and real team. Also the issue with the games is not coding. You can outsource the entire work if you know what you want, and you have money, both. If you don't, you cannot make a game. 

Star citizen has half a a billion dollars and even that wasn't enough because its still not done and riddled with bugs, so you need hire an actual team  of competent people and when I say team I mean more then 1-3, so 20-40 people max.

Star citizen is example for incompetent management. Take Gloria Victis, they made a MMO for less than a million. Initially it started with few people coding in their free time. But they were unbale to finish the project. Then it was acquired by Black Eye Games, and done. The game has some good ideas, but for me personally factions ruin it. As there are very few games where factions and guilds work well - DAOC is the only example I can point. And in general even there are issues. Guilds are the core of any MMORPG. If guilds are pointless, the MMO part is pointless.

The truth as is so often the case lies between these extremes, you are going to be lucky to make a great game with less than a million but it can be done. You are going to have to be unlucky to make a poor game with 500 million but it can be done. That "luck" can include good and bad management, but we have seen strong studios with solid track records still make a less than great game. It is not down to one factor like money or management, but a combination of many and that's where the luck comes in.

While I agree, especially about the many factors part, a lot of what I see are choices, not luck.  How many games have come around with the full loot, open world PvP when it has been shown than PvE is generally better revenue potential, especially in the MMORPG space.  All too many games are saddled with questionable management that continuously makes bad choices.  Even more of them want to 'double down' with their bad ideas.  The results are all too frequently bad games with questionable monetization that have issues with scheduling and project management.

Having been involved in many management products this happens often. The wrong decisions are made and people double down either to maintain their reputation, or the companies. Some decisions are very hard to row back. It took AGS over two years (?) to go from only PvP to curated to mid level PvE. So yes, bad choices are often the issue, but not making them and rectifying them is hellishly difficult.

Scot

kitarad said:

These are some of the full loot open PvP games on Steam. Their populations are pitiful examples of why these games do so badly.

Last Oasis   https://steamcharts.com/app/903950

Wild Terra Online 1 https://steamcharts.com/app/500710

The first did so well they decided to make a second Wild Terra Online   https://steamcharts.com/app/1134700

Mortal Online 2 is doing better than the ones above but still hardly profitable.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1170950

Legends of Aria https://steamcharts.com/app/594770

I think Albion Online and EvE are the exceptions. 

 New World is doing much better because players have the choice to PvP or not.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1063730

We have been told a few times that AO and EvE are not true open loot PvP. From those posters "It depends where you go".

That may suggest why they are doing better, but they are solid games and EvE has a niche all to its own.

Sovrath

Dibdabs said:

ikcin said:...If guilds are pointless, the MMO part is pointless.

So many guild are absolute shit though, which has rendered the very concept of guilds to be of no relevance to me and probably a fair number of other players.  There will be good ones, there will be outstanding ones, but I can't be arsed to wade through all the guilds in a game to find a decent one.  A game with no provision for guilds whatsoever would make me more inclined to consider buying it.

I think that comes down to who is running it and how guilds figure into the game play.

In Lineage 2 the game was about pvp and you have to have either a close knit guild or a very well run/managed guild.

In Black Desert the guild members can help build the guild and the guild leaders can create mini quests/tasks for guild members. The guild can also pay its members.

I remember someone spamming me a guild invite in some game and I declined. The person asked me why and I told them I didn't know anything about their guild or leadership. The response was "it's not a freakin' job interview."

But for me, if I'm going to spend time with a group of people, I need to know that I'm at least aligned with the core values of the leadership and the members. That's why if I'm going to join a guild where I don't know the members I actually do the research. At the very least meet and hang with them.

Guilds can augment if not "make" the game but some effort needs to be put in by the players. And of course the developers need to make guilds relevant.

Sovrath

kitarad said:

These are some of the full loot open PvP games on Steam. Their populations are pitiful examples of why these games do so badly.

Last Oasis   https://steamcharts.com/app/903950

Wild Terra Online 1 https://steamcharts.com/app/500710

The first did so well they decided to make a second Wild Terra Online   https://steamcharts.com/app/1134700

Mortal Online 2 is doing better than the ones above but still hardly profitable.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1170950

Legends of Aria https://steamcharts.com/app/594770

I think Albion Online and EvE are the exceptions. 

 New World is doing much better because players have the choice to PvP or not.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1063730

They are the exceptions because they are "better made." I bet dollars to donuts that if there was an new AAA pvp game it would do pretty well. At least initially. Oftentimes these games can't continue their success because the content is blown through relatively quickly.

Another point on extreme pvp games: players are oftentimes saying that "games aren't made by people with passion but corporate executives blah blah blah." So you get players with passion who make a game they want to play, and we see that they are trying to make a pvp game, we then get "why are they wasting their time they need to make something financially successful!"

That's a general statement to be sure but we can't have it both ways. Players with development chops are going to try to make games they like and there are people who love pvp games.

Uwakionna

Sovrath said:

kitarad said:

These are some of the full loot open PvP games on Steam. Their populations are pitiful examples of why these games do so badly.

Last Oasis   https://steamcharts.com/app/903950

Wild Terra Online 1 https://steamcharts.com/app/500710

The first did so well they decided to make a second Wild Terra Online   https://steamcharts.com/app/1134700

Mortal Online 2 is doing better than the ones above but still hardly profitable.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1170950

Legends of Aria https://steamcharts.com/app/594770

I think Albion Online and EvE are the exceptions. 

 New World is doing much better because players have the choice to PvP or not.
https://steamcharts.com/app/1063730

They are the exceptions because they are "better made." I bet dollars to donuts that if there was an new AAA pvp game it would do pretty well. At least initially. Oftentimes these games can't continue their success because the content is blown through relatively quickly.

Another point on extreme pvp games: players are oftentimes saying that "games aren't made by people with passion but corporate executives blah blah blah." So you get players with passion who make a game they want to play, and we see that they are trying to make a pvp game, we then get "why are they wasting their time they need to make something financially successful!"

That's a general statement to be sure but we can't have it both ways. Players with development chops are going to try to make games they like and there are people who love pvp games.

Think it's reasonably safe to assume that the groups of players saying those things are not the same groups.

Kind of the full circle there though. Studios gravitate towards a certain kind of content because it's more widely received, the "disenfranchised" go "but this game used to be so good" or what-not and go off and make their own game, they learn why the studios drifted away because the present player base of the new niche game is...niche.

Niche games aren't bad, but it does impact scope and how one should be approaching game design and management. You can't make a big MMO with lots of overhead and expect it to work when targeting a niche audience. Having only a few exceptions to that kind of reinforces the point. A niche can only sustain so many titles.

Uwakionna

It's not that it "can't work". It's the question of how big an audience one is expecting for the scope one is trying to build to. Not simply on the matter of one's own game, but across competition as well. You're not just building a game for a niche, you're building it to compete with existing titles within a niche.

Graveblade

Unfortunately PvP doesn't work because game designers in the MMORPG space are unable to see beyond the current formula. The current formula doesn't work well.

One day someone will come along and blow this idea that it doesn't work out of the water. We have much better tech now too. It will allow much more interesting mechanics over the typical tab target pvp of old.

Brainy

Well first I dont see why an MMO even a PVE mmo doesnt have a PVP full loot server.  Cost is extremely minimal to do that, and you have a playerbase that will buy the game and play that mode.

With that said, the main reason these PVP games fail, is they dont offer a PVE server.  Once they build the game to stop relying on PVE targets as the content, and start building a game like DAOC that pits PVPers against eachother, right there the game will be more popular.

kitarad

The way developers make games these days profitability is a definite factor. If you don't prioritize the time required to get gear and make it easily acquired then you don't have an issue with FFA full loot because people can concentrate on the PvP without worrying about what they are losing.

Not too sure why the MMORPGs I listed were not doing that well. I have never tried them so have no idea what the reason is. Wild Online 1 had a PvE server but Wild Terra Online 2 does not have one. The most popular thread on the Wild Terra Online 2 forum on Steam is the one requesting a PvE server.

I guess developers can and will build what they like but profitability is not something they can ignore because it affects what future content they can afford to make. So it is not only about the desire to make a game but it also involves the realities of business.

The genre isn't really bursting with new ideas so right now the old systems are being flogged and it has not really producing good results. I am not sure what it indicates but I won't try these games until a PvE server is offered.

New World also changed their direction from a no choice PvP to the system they have now which I think is largely responsible for their success in comparison to the other titles I listed.

We are also not living in UO times when players were severely restricted in terms of the games they can play so a new FFA full loot PvP game has to also deal with a far higher rate of attrition than what UO had. Players walk away from games far more easily than they once did.

Brainy

kitarad said:

The way developers make games these days profitability is a definite factor. If you don't prioritize the time required to get gear and make it easily acquired then you don't have an issue with FFA full loot because people can concentrate on the PvP without worrying about what they are losing.

Not too sure why the MMORPGs I listed were not doing that well. I have never tried them so have no idea what the reason is. Wild Online 1 had a PvE server but Wild Terra Online 2 does not have one. The most popular thread on the Wild Terra Online 2 forum on Steam is the one requesting a PvE server.

I guess developers can and will build what they like but profitability is not something they can ignore because it affects what future content they can afford to make. So it is not only about the desire to make a game but it also involves the realities of business.

The genre isn't really bursting with new ideas so right now the old systems are being flogged and it has not really producing good results. I am not sure what it indicates but I won't try these games until a PvE server is offered.

New World also changed their direction from a no choice PvP to the system they have now which I think is largely responsible for their success in comparison to the other titles I listed.

We are also not living in UO times when players were severely restricted in terms of the games they can play so a new FFA full loot PvP game has to also deal with a far higher rate of attrition than what UO had. Players walk away from games far more easily than they once did.

Yep I agree, the devs are free to make the game they like, they are also free to lose all their money doing it and watch the game flop.  Games need customers.

NW 100% would have been the biggest flop of any AAA MMO in recent times if it would have launched with its Hardcore Alpha build.

What is interesting, is the list you had is some of the most successful titles.  There have been so many other full loot pvp titles that have completely flopped.  The MMO genre is littered with the corpses of failed "fool" loot PVP games.

BrotherMaynard

How is it  supposed to work? No Kickstarter? No concept jpegs? No stretch goals? Is this even a game??

-------------------

Now on a more serious note: if you ever try to get a game project going through a random gaming website, remember Charles de Gaulle's words:

“How can you govern a country which has 246 varieties of cheese?”

Don't say I didn't warn you...

Kilrain

BrotherMaynard said:

How is it  supposed to work? No Kickstarter? No concept jpegs? No stretch goals? Is this even a game??

-------------------

Now on a more serious note: if you ever try to get a game project going through a random gaming website, remember Charles de Gaulle's words:

“How can you govern a country which has 246 varieties of cheese?”

Don't say I didn't warn you...

This thread went exactly as I expected it to.