Interaction on a large scale, players and content, in a "realistic" simulation of a world.
Im never quite sure what people mean by this?...Do you mean it should take alot of time to cook a meal? Sleep? Should we be working 8+ hours in game like we do in real life? Is it realistic to fight a monster, take damage to almost dying, then fight another one seconds later? To me gaming is the escape from realistic, not the mirror image of it.
Interaction is just that. How long things take to do, how detailed that is, those are an entirely different subject matter.
I'm talking about any basic interaction that a Player, in a simulated world, might do. Dropping items on the ground and picking them up, stacking them where applicable, etc. is a big one in my opinion. Building things (and tearing them down), another big one. (Makeshift bridges, ladders, etc. would be very cool.)
Buying supplies from other players, making deals and/or contracts, working together using various skills, and just passing along current information are some of the Player interactions I'd like to see enhanced.
Other things that fit into this subject: making and selling maps. opening containers, doors, drawbridges, cages, etc. Sitting and lying down on furniture and the ground. Using tools, and attempt them on anything to see if there's an unexpected result (such as hammering on a strange rock). Rolling heavy boulders with a Strength check. Growing crops. Breeding critters. Picking apples, etc. (harvesting system used here, most likely.) Throwing anything that makes sense.
Basically, as far as the world interaction goes, just manipulating the world and things in it.
Edit and p.s. I agree about time, that's a very important factor for player enjoyment. However, in some cases, a good game design has to look at the effects on, say, the economy. I'm not calling for "realism" so much as some sort of workable game play.
Interaction on a large scale, players and content, in a "realistic" simulation of a world.
Im never quite sure what people mean by this?...Do you mean it should take alot of time to cook a meal? Sleep? Should we be working 8+ hours in game like we do in real life? Is it realistic to fight a monster, take damage to almost dying, then fight another one seconds later? To me gaming is the escape from realistic, not the mirror image of it.
Clearly people want to have to "relieve" themselves regularly during a play session, or have the "crap" literally and figuratively scared out of them when being chased by a dragon.
I do like the idea of being scared by a Dragon (as opposed to levelling past them into one-hit-land). But I don't want to step in someone's "crap"... if I'm not faster than them.
AI players that can join a party to fill out a group so you're not stuck waiting on (insert role type) to start a dungeon or whatever. Then also add in the ability to join sessions in progress to replace the AI players with actual players.
This isn't exactly new, by the way. Vermintide and Darktide do exactly this, so it's not like the tech has to be invented.
Also, I'd like to see a game try to dispense with DPS as a role. What?!? How would you ever kill anything with no DPS? Well, if everyone is capable of high DPS then you no longer need classes that do nothing but DPS. Isn't it overpowered to have the tank also able to do DPS? No, not if the healer and other roles also do DPS. Speaking of other roles, that's the whole point. It allows the game to reintroduce roles that were in older games that disappeared with the focus on the holy trinity of tank, healer, DPS. Namely the roles of controller and buffer/debuffer.
I found the gameplay more interesting and tactical with those roles in the group than the current status quo of the tank pulls the entire room on himself while the DPS burns it all down and the healer does their best to keep everyone alive. Then the tank is expected to pull the next room on himself before the last room is even finished. If someone isn't almost dying every pull you're going too slow. With the controller role a class had strong CC abilities where they could split groups up and keep a section of enemies parked on the side while the group delt with the rest. The buffer/debuffer would buff the party while debuffing the enemies to create a power delta in favor of the party. Bad guys, of course, could also apply debuffs so that role typically was responsible for cleansing as well. Tack on additional DPS responsibility and you have a pretty challenging class to play.
Post apocalypse setting. With shinies. Ehrhm I mean collectibles.
I am a scizo misanthrope. So one day I may go BANZAI on your post. Have not yet though. Maybe there is hope? Nah there is really none for me or the human race.
Perhaps a better question is what features reduce the need for it. Isolate and remove those factors and players will have all kinds of good reasons to interact.
As a side benefit, players will have kinds of reasons to complain because the convenience features that negated reasons to directly interact with others would be gone.
THe way you talk about mmos annoy mes lol. It's like you don't understand what they are xD
Choices in character creation should be actual choices, not a question if you know how to properly skill your character class.
For example if you create a wizard the choice could be size of mana pool, mana regen speed, and spell damage. So you can prioritize according to your personal preferences. For example if you want to have great peak damage you focus on the spell damage stat. Or if you want to focus on support spells the spell damage stat is your dump stat that you ignore.
Not Strength and Intelligence and I have to put everything in Intelligence anyway or my character is bust.
Perhaps a better question is what features reduce the need for it. Isolate and remove those factors and players will have all kinds of good reasons to interact.
As a side benefit, players will have kinds of reasons to complain because the convenience features that negated reasons to directly interact with others would be gone.
THe way you talk about mmos annoy mes lol. It's like you don't understand what they are xD
That's unfortunate, but has nothing to do with a lack of understanding on my part.
Also, I'd like to see a game try to dispense with DPS as a role. What?!? How would you ever kill anything with no DPS? Well, if everyone is capable of high DPS then you no longer need classes that do nothing but DPS. Isn't it overpowered to have the tank also able to do DPS? No, not if the healer and other roles also do DPS. Speaking of other roles, that's the whole point. It allows the game to reintroduce roles that were in older games that disappeared with the focus on the holy trinity of tank, healer, DPS. Namely the roles of controller and buffer/debuffer.
I found the gameplay more interesting and tactical with those roles in the group than the current status quo of the tank pulls the entire room on himself while the DPS burns it all down and the healer does their best to keep everyone alive. Then the tank is expected to pull the next room on himself before the last room is even finished. If someone isn't almost dying every pull you're going too slow. With the controller role a class had strong CC abilities where they could split groups up and keep a section of enemies parked on the side while the group delt with the rest. The buffer/debuffer would buff the party while debuffing the enemies to create a power delta in favor of the party. Bad guys, of course, could also apply debuffs so that role typically was responsible for cleansing as well. Tack on additional DPS responsibility and you have a pretty challenging class to play.
Good theory, but then you would have to scale the bosses up and those roles will literally be the same as before. I would go the opposite way and make each role not be dps the actual role. Even with armor sets those roles will always maintain. A tank will never go past 10 dps, a healer will never got past 20dps. Making people more inclined to group on regular content.
Perhaps a better question is what features reduce the need for it. Isolate and remove those factors and players will have all kinds of good reasons to interact.
As a side benefit, players will have kinds of reasons to complain because the convenience features that negated reasons to directly interact with others would be gone.
THe way you talk about mmos annoy mes lol. It's like you don't understand what they are xD
That's unfortunate, but has nothing to do with a lack of understanding on my part.
understandable, I still like reading your comments !
Sitting and lying down on furniture and the ground. <snip>
This triggered one of my pet peeves -- incomplete animated emotes. Many games let me sit down in a chair in a tavern, then make me stand up to drink or eat. I rarely stand to eat. If you're going to animate emotes, make a complete set of animations -- in all postures.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Sitting and lying down on furniture and the ground. <snip>
This triggered one of my pet peeves -- incomplete animated emotes. Many games let me sit down in a chair in a tavern, then make me stand up to drink or eat. I rarely stand to eat. If you're going to animate emotes, make a complete set of animations -- in all postures.
I didn't know that was a thing, since I haven't played many games because of my distaste for Themepark. But it's strange to me because your talking about an animation that can easily be copied from standing to sitting positions. Maybe it's simply time and storage (money), but that's a "4th wall" breaking thing and pretty important, in my opinion.
Also, I'd like to see a game try to dispense with DPS as a role. What?!? How would you ever kill anything with no DPS? Well, if everyone is capable of high DPS then you no longer need classes that do nothing but DPS. Isn't it overpowered to have the tank also able to do DPS? No, not if the healer and other roles also do DPS. Speaking of other roles, that's the whole point. It allows the game to reintroduce roles that were in older games that disappeared with the focus on the holy trinity of tank, healer, DPS. Namely the roles of controller and buffer/debuffer.
I found the gameplay more interesting and tactical with those roles in the group than the current status quo of the tank pulls the entire room on himself while the DPS burns it all down and the healer does their best to keep everyone alive. Then the tank is expected to pull the next room on himself before the last room is even finished. If someone isn't almost dying every pull you're going too slow. With the controller role a class had strong CC abilities where they could split groups up and keep a section of enemies parked on the side while the group delt with the rest. The buffer/debuffer would buff the party while debuffing the enemies to create a power delta in favor of the party. Bad guys, of course, could also apply debuffs so that role typically was responsible for cleansing as well. Tack on additional DPS responsibility and you have a pretty challenging class to play.
Good theory, but then you would have to scale the bosses up and those roles will literally be the same as before. I would go the opposite way and make each role not be dps the actual role. Even with armor sets those roles will always maintain. A tank will never go past 10 dps, a healer will never got past 20dps. Making people more inclined to group on regular content.
I don't think they'd be the same, rather it sounds like it's doing away with the DPS role by making them all DPS roles.
Another point. One of my issues with all games is that they always seem to overdo things. In this case, it's the scale of difference. If, say, a Healer can also do damage (just not quite as much), and some sorts of crowd control, then they have other options besides just Healing. Why does the current limitations seem desirable to Gamers? It seems very boring to me. It also causes any possibilities of going Solo a real problem. Smaller differences is the way to go for those of you who like the Themepark style, it seems to me. Narrow definitions and limitations to game play breed boredom.
This is just another example of my biggest beef, the Power Scales that do so much harm to the freedom of "go anywhere" (just a term, not to be taken 100%), and even more so to Socializing among a broader percent of the player base.
This "overdoing" has widely prevalent consequences, and also harms such things as Food Requirements because they make such things such a pain in the arse, instead of a playable experience for more depth and meaning.
Sitting and lying down on furniture and the ground. <snip>
This triggered one of my pet peeves -- incomplete animated emotes. Many games let me sit down in a chair in a tavern, then make me stand up to drink or eat. I rarely stand to eat. If you're going to animate emotes, make a complete set of animations -- in all postures.
I didn't know that was a thing, since I haven't played many games because of my distaste for Themepark. But it's strange to me because your talking about an animation that can easily be copied from standing to sitting positions. Maybe it's simply time and storage (money), but that's a "4th wall" breaking thing and pretty important, in my opinion.
There's a small but annoying technical hurdle around this based upon how animations are built for any given games.
Some games are designed with the notion of animation blending, using different components of animations assembled into a set for animating characters, allowing for a good amount of flexibility in how a model is animated and allowing things like moving or sitting while doing something with one's arms.
A lot of games are designed with a very classic full-body method of creating animations though, which only allows for limited retargeting and movement of the model through inverse kinematics forcing it within the game.
It's a weird little difference in design that requires the devs and artists to be a little more technically minded and think ahead in a way that's just not common. a somewhat lite version of what one might call technical debt.
Sitting and lying down on furniture and the ground. <snip>
This triggered one of my pet peeves -- incomplete animated emotes. Many games let me sit down in a chair in a tavern, then make me stand up to drink or eat. I rarely stand to eat. If you're going to animate emotes, make a complete set of animations -- in all postures.
I didn't know that was a thing, since I haven't played many games because of my distaste for Themepark. But it's strange to me because your talking about an animation that can easily be copied from standing to sitting positions. Maybe it's simply time and storage (money), but that's a "4th wall" breaking thing and pretty important, in my opinion.
There's a small but annoying technical hurdle around this based upon how animations are built for any given games.
Some games are designed with the notion of animation blending, using different components of animations assembled into a set for animating characters, allowing for a good amount of flexibility in how a model is animated and allowing things like moving or sitting while doing something with one's arms.
A lot of games are designed with a very classic full-body method of creating animations though, which only allows for limited retargeting and movement of the model through inverse kinematics forcing it within the game.
It's a weird little difference in design that requires the devs and artists to be a little more technically minded and think ahead in a way that's just not common. a somewhat lite version of what one might call technical debt.
Thanks for the explanation. The designers, I assume, made the wrong choice for this then? At least if they cared enough to give it a second thought. Personally, while I've seen this sort of shallow planning many times in all sorts of fields, it's always astounded me.
It's such a waste. And costly, one way or another.
Also, I'd like to see a game try to dispense with DPS as a role. What?!? How would you ever kill anything with no DPS? Well, if everyone is capable of high DPS then you no longer need classes that do nothing but DPS. Isn't it overpowered to have the tank also able to do DPS? No, not if the healer and other roles also do DPS. Speaking of other roles, that's the whole point. It allows the game to reintroduce roles that were in older games that disappeared with the focus on the holy trinity of tank, healer, DPS. Namely the roles of controller and buffer/debuffer.
I found the gameplay more interesting and tactical with those roles in the group than the current status quo of the tank pulls the entire room on himself while the DPS burns it all down and the healer does their best to keep everyone alive. Then the tank is expected to pull the next room on himself before the last room is even finished. If someone isn't almost dying every pull you're going too slow. With the controller role a class had strong CC abilities where they could split groups up and keep a section of enemies parked on the side while the group delt with the rest. The buffer/debuffer would buff the party while debuffing the enemies to create a power delta in favor of the party. Bad guys, of course, could also apply debuffs so that role typically was responsible for cleansing as well. Tack on additional DPS responsibility and you have a pretty challenging class to play.
Good theory, but then you would have to scale the bosses up and those roles will literally be the same as before. I would go the opposite way and make each role not be dps the actual role. Even with armor sets those roles will always maintain. A tank will never go past 10 dps, a healer will never got past 20dps. Making people more inclined to group on regular content.
I read that as "NO DPS" rather than "ALL DPS." I want everyone to do damage, not just specif roles. With buffs, debuffs, and crowd control going on, bosses could play differently. It's how it's implemented that matter. I want my "healer" deciding in a group if I have enough mana to make a big hit or save it for the healing I know is incoming
I haven't played every MMO ever made, but I liked when EQ had orc shamans that blinded players, diseased them, rooted/slowed them and used the same spells/abilities as players did.
So much could be done with MMORPGs that simply don't fit the current "success template."
- 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
Sitting and lying down on furniture and the ground. <snip>
This triggered one of my pet peeves -- incomplete animated emotes. Many games let me sit down in a chair in a tavern, then make me stand up to drink or eat. I rarely stand to eat. If you're going to animate emotes, make a complete set of animations -- in all postures.
I didn't know that was a thing, since I haven't played many games because of my distaste for Themepark. But it's strange to me because your talking about an animation that can easily be copied from standing to sitting positions. Maybe it's simply time and storage (money), but that's a "4th wall" breaking thing and pretty important, in my opinion.
There's a small but annoying technical hurdle around this based upon how animations are built for any given games.
Some games are designed with the notion of animation blending, using different components of animations assembled into a set for animating characters, allowing for a good amount of flexibility in how a model is animated and allowing things like moving or sitting while doing something with one's arms.
A lot of games are designed with a very classic full-body method of creating animations though, which only allows for limited retargeting and movement of the model through inverse kinematics forcing it within the game.
It's a weird little difference in design that requires the devs and artists to be a little more technically minded and think ahead in a way that's just not common. a somewhat lite version of what one might call technical debt.
This reminds of the stories about how developers "used to" use their noggins in order to "work around" limitations. They may not have been "pretty", or "correct", but they worked
- 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
Comments
I'm talking about any basic interaction that a Player, in a simulated world, might do.
Dropping items on the ground and picking them up, stacking them where applicable, etc. is a big one in my opinion.
Building things (and tearing them down), another big one. (Makeshift bridges, ladders, etc. would be very cool.)
Buying supplies from other players, making deals and/or contracts, working together using various skills, and just passing along current information are some of the Player interactions I'd like to see enhanced.
Other things that fit into this subject:
making and selling maps.
opening containers, doors, drawbridges, cages, etc.
Sitting and lying down on furniture and the ground.
Using tools, and attempt them on anything to see if there's an unexpected result (such as hammering on a strange rock).
Rolling heavy boulders with a Strength check.
Growing crops.
Breeding critters.
Picking apples, etc. (harvesting system used here, most likely.)
Throwing anything that makes sense.
Basically, as far as the world interaction goes, just manipulating the world and things in it.
Edit and p.s.
I agree about time, that's a very important factor for player enjoyment. However, in some cases, a good game design has to look at the effects on, say, the economy. I'm not calling for "realism" so much as some sort of workable game play.
Once upon a time....
But I don't want to step in someone's "crap"...
if I'm not faster than them.
Once upon a time....
This isn't exactly new, by the way. Vermintide and Darktide do exactly this, so it's not like the tech has to be invented.
Lets hope Ashes of Creation has some of it.
I found the gameplay more interesting and tactical with those roles in the group than the current status quo of the tank pulls the entire room on himself while the DPS burns it all down and the healer does their best to keep everyone alive. Then the tank is expected to pull the next room on himself before the last room is even finished. If someone isn't almost dying every pull you're going too slow. With the controller role a class had strong CC abilities where they could split groups up and keep a section of enemies parked on the side while the group delt with the rest. The buffer/debuffer would buff the party while debuffing the enemies to create a power delta in favor of the party. Bad guys, of course, could also apply debuffs so that role typically was responsible for cleansing as well. Tack on additional DPS responsibility and you have a pretty challenging class to play.
Have not yet though. Maybe there is hope?
Nah there is really none for me or the human race.
THe way you talk about mmos annoy mes lol. It's like you don't understand what they are xD
Shadowbane had this.
That's unfortunate, but has nothing to do with a lack of understanding on my part.
Good theory, but then you would have to scale the bosses up and those roles will literally be the same as before. I would go the opposite way and make each role not be dps the actual role. Even with armor sets those roles will always maintain. A tank will never go past 10 dps, a healer will never got past 20dps. Making people more inclined to group on regular content.
understandable, I still like reading your comments !
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
But it's strange to me because your talking about an animation that can easily be copied from standing to sitting positions. Maybe it's simply time and storage (money), but that's a "4th wall" breaking thing and pretty important, in my opinion.
Once upon a time....
Another point. One of my issues with all games is that they always seem to overdo things. In this case, it's the scale of difference.
If, say, a Healer can also do damage (just not quite as much), and some sorts of crowd control, then they have other options besides just Healing.
Why does the current limitations seem desirable to Gamers? It seems very boring to me. It also causes any possibilities of going Solo a real problem.
Smaller differences is the way to go for those of you who like the Themepark style, it seems to me.
Narrow definitions and limitations to game play breed boredom.
This is just another example of my biggest beef, the Power Scales that do so much harm to the freedom of "go anywhere" (just a term, not to be taken 100%), and even more so to Socializing among a broader percent of the player base.
This "overdoing" has widely prevalent consequences, and also harms such things as Food Requirements because they make such things such a pain in the arse, instead of a playable experience for more depth and meaning.
Damn, Devs, get your act together.
Once upon a time....
Some games are designed with the notion of animation blending, using different components of animations assembled into a set for animating characters, allowing for a good amount of flexibility in how a model is animated and allowing things like moving or sitting while doing something with one's arms.
A lot of games are designed with a very classic full-body method of creating animations though, which only allows for limited retargeting and movement of the model through inverse kinematics forcing it within the game.
It's a weird little difference in design that requires the devs and artists to be a little more technically minded and think ahead in a way that's just not common. a somewhat lite version of what one might call technical debt.
The designers, I assume, made the wrong choice for this then? At least if they cared enough to give it a second thought.
Personally, while I've seen this sort of shallow planning many times in all sorts of fields, it's always astounded me.
It's such a waste. And costly, one way or another.
Once upon a time....
- 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
This reminds of the stories about how developers "used to" use their noggins in order to "work around" limitations. They may not have been "pretty", or "correct", but they worked
- 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