Stephen King's The Dark Tower is an excellent setting for an MMO. I like it so much I might make it myself! Well, not make it myself, more like beg other people to do so
This x1000.
I've always said The Dark Tower is total MMO fodder, and would make for amazing multi-dimensional world gameplay. It has the Wild West aesthetic while still leaving itself WIDE OPEN for the supernatural, and expansive exploration into unknown territories.
There's a side story from the Dark Tower universe titled "Little Sisters of Eluria" that was wonderfully evil, and introduced even more creatures to the Roland of Gilead repertoire.
I would definitely play it as long as it has a deep crafting system, optional PvP, the option to play as a Native American and it to be an open world mmo.
Not for me, have never been a fan of the Wild West.
Perhaps its part of being British, but we just don't have any equivalent landscape in our countries or any equivalent timeperiod in our history where we had "frontiers" etc, so there is nothing to connect me to the Wild West. I just don't like deserts / scrubland and the yellow/orange colour palette.
However, if it was built well then I might play. We've never had a AAA sandbox MMO, so if the first one happened to be set in the Wild West then I'd probably give it a go just to see what it's like.
You're right the British were never an expansionist empire. You may want do some reading about your country in Africa/India and elsewhere. It makes the Wild Wild west look pretty mild.
I know we expanded and had frontiers, but I always sort of thought the frontiers were primarily fights against people as we took over their country, whereas I sort of got the impression that the wild west was more a case of man vs environment.
Not at all, and this is part of why a Wild West MMO wouldn't work, because few people truly understand the history behind it. All of North, Central, and South America had been fully habitated by native american tribes for tens of thousands of years before any Europeans came over to this part of the world. We repeatedly tore apart and killed their people and their cultures, or just flat out lied and cheated our way to their lands, in order to colonize these continents. It's a brutal, bloody, and shameful history across the board that has been romanticized in books and moves for decades, but it's anything but. The Americas haven't been empty of people for about 40,000 years.
Yeah rinse and repeat that all over the world for centuries. The western Expansion of the United States was not, by a long shot, the first example of one culture basically destroying another. Wanna talk about Persians and a good potion of the planet? And what they did? How about in much more recent history the Japanese and Koreans? How about we talk about Isis and what they do n a daily basis to expand their territory. No, the U.S. has nothing to be proud of along the lines of how it treated the indigenous peoples of this continent however, our forefathers (at least mine) were not the inventors not the first practitioners of this form of genocide.
I suggest climbing down off the soap box.
BTW there are Wild West MMO's...they do work, they are just very Niche and as the OP pointed out not high quality.
But we're not talking about making games about any of those cultures are we?
A game based on the development of a frontier is one thing, a game based around a genocide is another. In the case of a Wild West game either you include the genocidal aspects or you plaster over them. Either way you are inviting a storm of protest.
I dunno. I get ( hypothetically ) 1400 xp and 2 gold every gnoll camp I clear. You tell me.
They. just. keep. making. babies.
Are you really saying that a game killing native Americans is OK because we have games killing invented creatures? That is getting awfully close to justifying actual violence because of violence in video games. Do we really want to head down that path? Personally I would prefer to keep my games to virtual situations against fantasy creatures.
No, I'm saying you don't realize we all, already, play all manners of game which include justified species or "lifestyle" extermination. You're arguing a game based on "genocide" is somehow abhorrent, but if you participate in many mmos, you play such games all the time, albeit with some conceived disconnect.
I don't think positing specifically earth-related natives in a game "to kill", with that being the intended message, would be appropriate, certainly. How different is it, though, from the opponent tribes in the new Farcry, or the dervs of Ro, or the Skyrim forsworn, or, heck, the competition between orcs and humans in a number of games? You emulate this in playtime. Pretending it's somehow abject because you can paint a particular face to it is hypocrisy.
A game based on the development of a frontier is one thing, a game based around a genocide is another. In the case of a Wild West game either you include the genocidal aspects or you plaster over them. Either way you are inviting a storm of protest.
I dunno. I get ( hypothetically ) 1400 xp and 2 gold every gnoll camp I clear. You tell me.
They. just. keep. making. babies.
Are you really saying that a game killing native Americans is OK because we have games killing invented creatures? That is getting awfully close to justifying actual violence because of violence in video games. Do we really want to head down that path? Personally I would prefer to keep my games to virtual situations against fantasy creatures.
No, I'm saying you don't realize we all, already, play all manners of game which include justified species or "lifestyle" extermination. You're arguing a game based on "genocide" is somehow abhorrent, but if you participate in many mmos, you play such games all the time, albeit with some conceived disconnect.
I don't think positing specifically earth-related natives in a game "to kill", with that being the intended message, would be appropriate, certainly. How different is it, though, from the opponent tribes in the new Farcry, or the dervs of Ro, or the Skyrim forsworn, or, heck, the competition between orcs and humans in a number of games? You emulate this in playtime. Pretending it's somehow abject because you can paint a particular face to it is hypocrisy.
So are you advocating the closure of games with any racially based killing? An end to the slaughter of orcs, gnolls, foresworn and dervs? There are surely some lines that can be drawn here and I think that the recreation in a virtual world of an actual genocide clearly crosses them.
no, I wouldn't. I am about on my last legs with MMOs as a genre as it is. there is no MMO coming out that looks remotely interesting to me, and I havent had any desire to play any others different from the ones I play now, primarily SWTOR, and i only rarely log into TSW or DCUO or EQ2 every few months, only because i have lifetime subs to those. I dont consider The Division an MMO and will get it for my PS4.
A game based on the development of a frontier is one thing, a game based around a genocide is another. In the case of a Wild West game either you include the genocidal aspects or you plaster over them. Either way you are inviting a storm of protest.
I dunno. I get ( hypothetically ) 1400 xp and 2 gold every gnoll camp I clear. You tell me.
They. just. keep. making. babies.
Are you really saying that a game killing native Americans is OK because we have games killing invented creatures? That is getting awfully close to justifying actual violence because of violence in video games. Do we really want to head down that path? Personally I would prefer to keep my games to virtual situations against fantasy creatures.
No, I'm saying you don't realize we all, already, play all manners of game which include justified species or "lifestyle" extermination. You're arguing a game based on "genocide" is somehow abhorrent, but if you participate in many mmos, you play such games all the time, albeit with some conceived disconnect.
I don't think positing specifically earth-related natives in a game "to kill", with that being the intended message, would be appropriate, certainly. How different is it, though, from the opponent tribes in the new Farcry, or the dervs of Ro, or the Skyrim forsworn, or, heck, the competition between orcs and humans in a number of games? You emulate this in playtime. Pretending it's somehow abject because you can paint a particular face to it is hypocrisy.
So are you advocating the closure of games with any racially based killing? An end to the slaughter of orcs, gnolls, foresworn and dervs? There are surely some lines that can be drawn here and I think that the recreation in a virtual world of an actual genocide clearly crosses them.
Nope. I wasn't the one who said, "A game based on the development of a frontier is one thing, a game based around a genocide is another.". I was the one who pointed out, "you and I both already play that game, and we like it".
Are you advocating the closure of games with any racially based killing?
A game based on the development of a frontier is one thing, a game based around a genocide is another. In the case of a Wild West game either you include the genocidal aspects or you plaster over them. Either way you are inviting a storm of protest.
I dunno. I get ( hypothetically ) 1400 xp and 2 gold every gnoll camp I clear. You tell me.
They. just. keep. making. babies.
Are you really saying that a game killing native Americans is OK because we have games killing invented creatures? That is getting awfully close to justifying actual violence because of violence in video games. Do we really want to head down that path? Personally I would prefer to keep my games to virtual situations against fantasy creatures.
No, I'm saying you don't realize we all, already, play all manners of game which include justified species or "lifestyle" extermination. You're arguing a game based on "genocide" is somehow abhorrent, but if you participate in many mmos, you play such games all the time, albeit with some conceived disconnect.
I don't think positing specifically earth-related natives in a game "to kill", with that being the intended message, would be appropriate, certainly. How different is it, though, from the opponent tribes in the new Farcry, or the dervs of Ro, or the Skyrim forsworn, or, heck, the competition between orcs and humans in a number of games? You emulate this in playtime. Pretending it's somehow abject because you can paint a particular face to it is hypocrisy.
So are you advocating the closure of games with any racially based killing? An end to the slaughter of orcs, gnolls, foresworn and dervs? There are surely some lines that can be drawn here and I think that the recreation in a virtual world of an actual genocide clearly crosses them.
Nope. I wasn't the one who said, "A game based on the development of a frontier is one thing, a game based around a genocide is another.". I was the one who pointed out, "you and I both already play that game, and we like it".
Are you advocating the closure of games with any racially based killing?
Yes I said that, and I said that because there is clearly a distinction between gnolls and native Americans. Your attempt at reductio ad absurdum fails. Neither of us is advocating the closure of existing games because both of us are aware that gnolls are fictional. As gnolls are not real neither of us 'plays that game already', there is no hypocrisy.
A game based on the development of a frontier is one thing, a game based around a genocide is another. In the case of a Wild West game either you include the genocidal aspects or you plaster over them. Either way you are inviting a storm of protest.
I dunno. I get ( hypothetically ) 1400 xp and 2 gold every gnoll camp I clear. You tell me.
They. just. keep. making. babies.
Are you really saying that a game killing native Americans is OK because we have games killing invented creatures? That is getting awfully close to justifying actual violence because of violence in video games. Do we really want to head down that path? Personally I would prefer to keep my games to virtual situations against fantasy creatures.
No, I'm saying you don't realize we all, already, play all manners of game which include justified species or "lifestyle" extermination. You're arguing a game based on "genocide" is somehow abhorrent, but if you participate in many mmos, you play such games all the time, albeit with some conceived disconnect.
I don't think positing specifically earth-related natives in a game "to kill", with that being the intended message, would be appropriate, certainly. How different is it, though, from the opponent tribes in the new Farcry, or the dervs of Ro, or the Skyrim forsworn, or, heck, the competition between orcs and humans in a number of games? You emulate this in playtime. Pretending it's somehow abject because you can paint a particular face to it is hypocrisy.
So are you advocating the closure of games with any racially based killing? An end to the slaughter of orcs, gnolls, foresworn and dervs? There are surely some lines that can be drawn here and I think that the recreation in a virtual world of an actual genocide clearly crosses them.
Nope. I wasn't the one who said, "A game based on the development of a frontier is one thing, a game based around a genocide is another.". I was the one who pointed out, "you and I both already play that game, and we like it".
Are you advocating the closure of games with any racially based killing?
Yes I said that, and I said that because there is clearly a distinction between gnolls and native Americans. Your attempt at reductio ad absurdum fails. Neither of us is advocating the closure of existing games because both of us are aware that gnolls are fictional. As gnolls are not real neither of us 'plays that game already', there is no hypocrisy.
Well, I did simplify in response. You can clearly see the order of operations above. How about other examples, wherein "opponents" are "human" of opposing tribes or factions? It's not like I'm going to run out of examples, here.
Really, simulated, even when you appropriate the disconnect, you're on shaky ground to argue humanitarianism considering how very anthropomorphised those beings, as gnolls, etc, are represented. It's very interesting to me how, in the discussion, you've tried to spin the obvious format twice now. I think I'll stop.
Not for me, have never been a fan of the Wild West.
Perhaps its part of being British, but we just don't have any equivalent landscape in our countries or any equivalent timeperiod in our history where we had "frontiers" etc, so there is nothing to connect me to the Wild West. I just don't like deserts / scrubland and the yellow/orange colour palette.
However, if it was built well then I might play. We've never had a AAA sandbox MMO, so if the first one happened to be set in the Wild West then I'd probably give it a go just to see what it's like.
You're right the British were never an expansionist empire. You may want do some reading about your country in Africa/India and elsewhere. It makes the Wild Wild west look pretty mild.
I know we expanded and had frontiers, but I always sort of thought the frontiers were primarily fights against people as we took over their country, whereas I sort of got the impression that the wild west was more a case of man vs environment.
Not at all, and this is part of why a Wild West MMO wouldn't work, because few people truly understand the history behind it. All of North, Central, and South America had been fully habitated by native american tribes for tens of thousands of years before any Europeans came over to this part of the world. We repeatedly tore apart and killed their people and their cultures, or just flat out lied and cheated our way to their lands, in order to colonize these continents. It's a brutal, bloody, and shameful history across the board that has been romanticized in books and moves for decades, but it's anything but. The Americas haven't been empty of people for about 40,000 years.
Just like Khalid invaded the Byzantine Empire, The Mongol conquest of Asia, Caesar invaded Gaul, Alexander conquered most of the known world, Napoleon conquered half the world.... ffs, the entire earth's history is a brutal, bloody and shameful affair that has been repeatedly romanticized in media.
A game based on the development of a frontier is one thing, a game based around a genocide is another. In the case of a Wild West game either you include the genocidal aspects or you plaster over them. Either way you are inviting a storm of protest.
I dunno. I get ( hypothetically ) 1400 xp and 2 gold every gnoll camp I clear. You tell me.
They. just. keep. making. babies.
Are you really saying that a game killing native Americans is OK because we have games killing invented creatures? That is getting awfully close to justifying actual violence because of violence in video games. Do we really want to head down that path? Personally I would prefer to keep my games to virtual situations against fantasy creatures.
May I suggest you stay away from gaming, in general? You seem to have troubles separating games from reality. I kill a gnoll in a game. You do realize I did not really kill a gnoll, right? I use a shotgun to kill another human being in a game. You realize that I did not really kill that person, right?
Most popular video games are all about killing. Most of the time indiscriminately. Get on your soapbox if you want. This is not about reality.
Comments
This x1000.
I've always said The Dark Tower is total MMO fodder, and would make for amazing multi-dimensional world gameplay. It has the Wild West aesthetic while still leaving itself WIDE OPEN for the supernatural, and expansive exploration into unknown territories.
There's a side story from the Dark Tower universe titled "Little Sisters of Eluria" that was wonderfully evil, and introduced even more creatures to the Roland of Gilead repertoire.
I don't think positing specifically earth-related natives in a game "to kill", with that being the intended message, would be appropriate, certainly. How different is it, though, from the opponent tribes in the new Farcry, or the dervs of Ro, or the Skyrim forsworn, or, heck, the competition between orcs and humans in a number of games? You emulate this in playtime. Pretending it's somehow abject because you can paint a particular face to it is hypocrisy.
There are surely some lines that can be drawn here and I think that the recreation in a virtual world of an actual genocide clearly crosses them.
Are you advocating the closure of games with any racially based killing?
Neither of us is advocating the closure of existing games because both of us are aware that gnolls are fictional. As gnolls are not real neither of us 'plays that game already', there is no hypocrisy.
Really, simulated, even when you appropriate the disconnect, you're on shaky ground to argue humanitarianism considering how very anthropomorphised those beings, as gnolls, etc, are represented. It's very interesting to me how, in the discussion, you've tried to spin the obvious format twice now. I think I'll stop.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkCqSHwhKVg
Once upon a time....
Not only that, but smallpox killed many times more Natives than any army invented ever could have hoped to kill, and that was completely unintentional.
So can we all stop self flagellating about it now and move on with our lives?
Also, the irony of MMO players talking about genocide when that's pretty much 99% of the activity of any MMO in existence is just rich.
Most popular video games are all about killing. Most of the time indiscriminately. Get on your soapbox if you want. This is not about reality.
PS: Genocide? Really? Over dramatize much?
VG