All Posts by Guintu

Originally posted by gillvane1

What's your favorite thing to do in an MMORPG? Please answer the poll according to this scenario. You have lots of things to do in RL, but suddenly you have some free time to play your favorite MMO. You can only do one thing with the free time available to you. What is the number one thing you want to do?

Yes, I know some of you will say you like everything, or you like different things on different days, but in this case you can only pick one. If there is something you like to do in an MMORPG that is not listed in the Poll, please post what it is.

 

MMORPG Maker

I like questing, but only good quests.  not kill 100 of this or get 1000 bones from that.  Most games though don't have the real questing yet.  Hopefully soon.

Try perfect world, its the most like WoW I've seen so far.

I wouldn't say pure permadeath would be good because then you'd have to make up a new character each time you died.  How about you just de-level to level 1 and you loose everything.  Or maybe you just de-level 10 levels each death.

Originally posted by ShadowZERO

 

Originally posted by Kilmar

I prefer MMOs, where equipment isnt so important. So I dont have to do the same dungeon over and over and over again to get good gear. In wow you have to do the same dungeon like 100 times to get enough gear to compete in the next dungeon. Thats what I'm calling armor grind. Then there are games, where armor isnt so important, and you can go in harder dungeons without grinding armor for months.

So basically, you are saying that you like games where gear isn't so important.  Next.

 

This is the opposite of what i'm looking for.  How would you, as a deveoper, solve this problem?  Not what you like and don't.  We all have things we like and don't.  Question is, seeing how certain problems have been solved(or even more importantly, not solved) in other games, how would you solve this problem if YOU were devloping a game?

Well in RL equipment is important but there is a limited type that you can use.  Say you're a cop, you wear a bulletproof vest which is important but its not like they make 100 kinds of bulletproof vests.  Same if you were a Knight back in the olden days, your armor may look different but it was made from the same materials basically.  Now I know in an mmo there is magic so armor can be enchanted, so thats what you have, armor that looks different (maybe have a custom button so you can easily make your armor look different by adding different color or make little changes the look), but all in all its the same armor, and you just have it enchanted.  If someone in your guild can enchant then it can be done for free otherwise you have to go to an enchanter and it may cost.  The idea is one person may go to one enchanter and one may go to another and get different enchantments but there is no level 1 - 200 enchantments, there is only one per armor.  If sometime down the line you meet someone who can do an enchantment that you like better then you can have it but the one you had done is gone.  You can have other armor made for you and have a different enchantment done on it but the initial armor would be made of the same material as the last armor just the enchantment would be different. You can only carry 2-3 suites of armor at a time, because you'd have to watch how much weight is in your pack.  Carrying 2-3 suits of armor would slow you down and make fighting hard unless you have a mount.  So in a way equipment would be important but its more of a status thing, regular fighters may get just regular armor while captains and such may get armor that looks a little nicer, shiny, ornate.  This way there may be thousands of different looking armors but only maybe 10 or so enchantments, and only 1 per armor, so it would make things more even on the battlefield.  

Originally posted by Raston

There really hasn't been a true MMORPG yet.  Most of what we have are MMOAAG (MMO Action and Adventure Games).  Yes, you are put into a role, but it is a forced role where you (typically) have no real input on how it is played.  You are either stuck in a class, restrained by levels or needing to get x gear.  There is no...  Personality in it for lack of a better direction.  Some games have come close (but had fundemental flaws) like AO and AC.  UO probably came the closest, but I'll be honest, I can stand to play it, I've never been a fan of the forced perspective ISO game system.

I agree with you here.

Take even something as RPG basic as DnD.  How often did you throw away your gear in the PnP game?  Typically you found a set up that worked for you and that is what you stuck with because the gear was pretty neutral, it was your decisions and stats that mattered.  The world was an open sandbox for your adventures.

I haven't played a PnP game in a LONG time, but I do remember taking foes armor if it was better than mine.

The problem is, the modern "MMORPG" has taken all the bad aspects of a game like DnD and added even the even worse concepts of time sinks and tediums to the mix, all in the effort to 'keep you subscribed' rather than adding interesting content, they take the easy way out.

True, but I found fault in D&D too, but you couldn't help it, because you had to use dice.

The mechanics behind the RPG doesn't matter, it is the concept that matters.  Like the OP, I'm not a big fan of FPS style mechanics in a game, I'm not the fasted reflexed person out there (ask anyone who has played a FPS with or against me, I'm an easy mark).  But I also find the wakamole style of EQ/WoW/LotRO to be weak too.

I pretty much suck at them too.lol  Wakamole, I like that.

The whole concept of levels needs to go, they serve no purpose in the modern game.  The concept of hit points, stamina and mana need to as well.  These need to be replaced by an open ended (with a diminishing curve) skill system with no classes or forced directions (AC almost had this, they just added the bad concept of levels to the game).  Health needs to be moved to a wound/death system, where noone is superman regardless of how long they played (see PnP games like Torg/master book and the White wolf systems if you need further detail on this).

No, here I think you're wrong.  In RL there is leveling.  When you have a job you usually start out at a low position and gain position as you do better...thats leveling.  I think an MMO should take more of a military style of leveling instead of a number style.  As you do better you gain rank instead of a number level.  I also think that instead of the game leveling you, it should be the leader of you're guild since you'll be in his/her troop...so to say.  If you're soloing you won't level, you'll just get better.  Unless say you're a robber and you start out with stores and move to houses, then banks that can be you're level up.  If you're say a private investigator, if you're doing small time...see if my wife is cheating on me quests, you're small time, but if you're say finding a missing person or finding out who killed someone then thats you're level.  In other words if your a cop you're in guild and have to take orders and if you don't fulfill those orders you won't get promoted.  If you're soloing you make you're on level so to way by doing more risky things.

The real issue is the 'quests' though, there is nothing questing about them, they are more often than not pathetic little tasks that really have no fun factor.  I'd rather see NO quests than that crap.  Use a rumor system that can lead people to finding their own quests.  Let them find their own paths and destiny.

Agreed, but see above.

An RPG (in the since that I define it) should be about making YOUR mark on the world in YOUR fashion.  Not some predefined way, but in your own unique way.  No game has done this yet.  Some have come close (Shadowbane, Asheron's Call, Anarchy Online), but none has had the complete deal.  Here is what "I" think needs to exist to make the next generation of MMORPG a real RPG.

I agree with you here.

Political/Social aspects - The game would need to emphasize choices and sides.  Faction use, consequences, and player involvement need to be had.  I would take a variant of the EQ2 faction system and combine it with the political aspects of Shadowbane with the social concepts of the preNGE SWG.

I think politics should be more realistic in a way too.  You can choose between good and evil but you can also be a double agent.  I keep using police and military because its the easiest for me.  Say you're a cop and you go undercover to bring down someone.  Or you're an agent and you take a foes cloths to dress like them to infiltrate their lair.  You befriend someone to get info out of them they might leak to you.  You talk someone into joining your side and being a double agent.  Or you don't like you're leader so you switch sides, or you decide to kill him/her.  I can go on.

Combat - Combat needs to move away from whakamole, but needs to avoid the fps genera as well.  RPGs are geared around the skill of the character and not the skill of the player, now I understand you can't completely remove this aspect (and shouldn't) but the intellect of the player should be the only thing that shows through, not his physical ability to click a mouse hit the strife left/right keys.

This I totally agree with you to a point.  If you took skill out of the game then you're going back to a form of luck.  I think the main problem with FPS games is what I call the maniac player.  FPS games now you have people with good reflexes that just run out jump around and kill.  If you make this harder to do then you'll make the game more even.  If you have a good death system rather than just re-spawn, maybe you de-level 10 levels or back to level 1 and not really have to make a new character (unless you want to), but just start over.  This would give the maniac player a sense of fear to die hence he/she will play more cautiously.  Also a good MMOFPS would need a good cover system (Gears of War is best so far).  Make it so people have to use strategy and work as a team or if solowing work with their brain instead of JUST reaction time and aiming skill.  You could make it so in the begining their character isn't as good, or strong and in time gets better.  Maybe he can't do headshots as well if he's a sniper, but with practice he gets better.   The idea is to make a game that uses skill but not totally skill, and also uses luck but not total luck.  The luck part would be if you're quiet enough, or if someone sees your shadow, or if someone from the other team sees you in some other way.  Think of the games Thief or Hitman, where you have to use your senses in the game as well as knowing the NPC foes will in a way be using their senses as well so you have to be extra careful.

Skils/Levels - The game needs to be 100% skill based.  Eliminate the whole concept of levels.  Make attributes matter and give the mechanics to the players.  There is no reason to hide this from the players unless you are afraid of them finding weaknesses, which case, you definately should, you'll have a better game for it in the end if people understand what impacts their choices.  We aren't stupid, we shouldn't be treated like we are :)  I would say preNGE SWG would be the best skill system that has ever existed.  Highly flexible and made sense from a gamer perspective.  Need to keep the scaling down, keep the attributes within a workable range and the skills too.  You don't want to let these get out of hand, too many games have let that happen.

I think RF online has a good way of doing it.  If you pick up a sword and use it you'll get skills in sword and also seperate skills in specific attacks you use.  If you pick up a gun you'll get skills in that...etc.  I think it could go a step further though.  Say you pick up a gun, if you never used one before you'd have to learn to use it first.  You can either ask someone and it'll take you a shorter time or you can try and figure it out for yourself and it will take a while longer.  Also with a gun you have to not only buy bullets but you also have to keep it clean or it may misfire or get jammed.  Maybe with certain type of guns this will happen more than others.  In RL people in the military if they use their gun, when they have the chance to they clean it, same with cops.  Maybe if you don't you're gun may NEVER get jammed, it may be a 1 in 10,000 chance, but there is a chance.  FPS games have done this in the past where guns get jammed (you don't have to clean them though).  If you're using a knife maybe at first you'll just hold it one way, but after a while of someone teaching you you'll learn more ways, maybe by learning anatomy you'll learn the best ways to kill, or incapacitate, or torture someone with a knife.  In a game there would be skill and then there would be True Skill.  One is skill that the game itself gives you, and true skill is what you gain by doing different things and learning from other players.

Spells - yes please.  But none of that tiered crap.  Just let me cast it faster, let it hit harder and cost me less backlash.  Noone has done this yet.  I find it silly you have to upgrade a spell to something you already knew, just 10/12/14/etc levels higher...

I agree somewhat agree.  I mean since we don't have magic in RL who's to say hot it would work.  Look at TV shows & movies.  Some shows show magic as something you have and you have to learn to control. Say you shoot fire, maybe the first time you'll burn down your house so yo have to learn to control it.  Maybe its something that comes on gradually, maybe all you'll be able to do is light a candle, but as you learn the mind over matter thing then you can control it and you get better.    Look at the show Heroes for instance, some people just had their powers and they worked like Claire being able to heal herself.  Others had to learn to control their powers like the guy that can go radio active.  Then there was the spanish brother and sister, when she got scared people around her would die, but with her brother around he could control it for her.  Now she's learning to control it herself. 

Items/Equipment - shouldn't be the defining concept to how effective the character is.  Yes, they should have some impact, but they shouldnt' be the end all/be all of them either.  TCoS has this right.  Dress to Impress.  Let people be unique without hurting their characters and people will be unique.  At this point the gear becomes an extension of the personality, not an extension of the gameplay.  Do not let the gear become too altering to the game for if you do, they will become game defining.

I agree with you to a point.  Gear should mean something like wearing a bullet proof vest will be better than not waring one.  I do agree that with games gear does mean to much.  Their shouldn't be dozens of different types of gear.  You should have armor, and if you meet a magician who can put a spell on it and make it better then so be it.  Maybe start out with old armor that you can afford, maybe used by someone else, then move to better quality, but the quality has to stop somewhere.  Then it should be all about looks and what magic can make it better.  Same with weapons.  Sure if you use a gun, maybe you start out with a 9mm, but if you find a .45 you know how to use it because you've used the 9mm, but if you go to an oozie oyu may have to learn how to use that, plus their would be kick back and such. 

Quests - gah, just get rid of them.  Open the world up as a sand box and let us play.  Give us rumors, give us hints, but damn it don't tell us to kill 10 rats.  it gets old and boring and is likely the leading reason of burn out (for me anyways).

I disagree here.  Yes to quests but once a specific story quest is done then it can't be done by anyone else.  If their was a way to make a good player quest system then that would be good.  Meaning instead of the Devs having to make the quests the players make them.  Face of Mankind tried that and failed big time, but the reason for this was because every quest was "Patrol this area for 3 hours", or go and take over this area, nothing more.  The Devs didn't give any more options than that, and that was pretty sad.  Give the option for people to make more dynamic questing and maybe it would work better.  I do have a working idea of this but I won't divulge it in case I make a game myself.   :)

Lore - oh creator yes.  The more the better.  The key to ANY RPG is the world it is in.  The more people can understand the world, the easier it is to live within it and to understand it.  Shadowbane absolutely did the best of this and no one else has even come close.  It was a shame they didn't implement the lore they built, but hey, I'll give them credit where it is due.

I agree here.  The world is everything and good story telling is #1. 

One other thing I'd like to add is if you talk to an NPC let them talk back to you.  So far I think Pirates of the Caribbean did this the best.  You talk to someone who has a lengthy story to tell and you hear voice.  The only time you read is when you have to pick up a quest and usually those are small little tidbits they say.  This would make the game so much more interesting.  I don't know about most of you, but sometimes I get so sick of reading quests and such I just say yes to the quest and then find out what i have to kill and where it is and do it.  If I want to read I'd get a book, but if I'm playing a game it just takes away from the continuity of the game to have to stop and read.  I'd understand if its a letter or an email you're reading but if you're talking to someone let them speak.  Sure you may have to read an pick from a list of answers but who knows maybe even later on you'll just be able to say the answer or ask a question and you'll get a voice answer.  That may be many years from now, but to have NPC's talk is something that can be done here and now.

heh, that is probably enough ranting for now

Originally posted by admriker4

FPS has a place in video game world, but it isnt in MMO's.

MMO's are about investing time into an avatar to get better gear, higher level or skills, etc. This time + gear = more power. Its a basic component of MMO's.

FPS genre negates the whole point of investing time. Sure gear will still help somewhat as will your level. But ultimately any quasi-fps MMO still comes down to your basic ability to aim and click better than the other guy. Why invest time into reaching level 80, getting a better weapon, etc if some kid and his lvl 50 toon with hormones ablazing under a Mountain Dew high will kick your tail ?

If I want a quick thrill with no grind I play Halo with my son on occasion. But if I want an experience where my patience, time, and my intellect are rewarded I seek out MMO's. And I think the majority clearly feel the same. Otherwise these quasi-fps MMO attempts wouldnt keep failing.

Even the legendary Garriot couldnt make one work and those guys spent like 6 years on Tabula Rasa. Enough already guys. If Star Wars Galaxies, Planetside, Tabula Rasa, Face of Mankind and the many smaller MMO's couldnt make a hit perhaps you should listen.

And for some reason after all the failures the guys making AoC think its a good idea to attempt another quasi-fps game ?  This makes no sense.

I agree so far FPS mmos have been much to be desired, BUT I think if done right there could be good ones.  Sure you're right FPS now is more about who has the quicker reflexes, and most FPS games people just run out and start shooing without a care.  If you're quick you'll do well, if you're slow you won't.  I usually suck at these games.  The games I'm good at are the single player FPS where I can play the way I like to play, I use cover, I can sneak up on people, and use my brain since a 15 year old will have faster reflexes than me (especially since I gave up caffine).  I think the whole idea isn't not to make FPSMMO's but to make it so their more realistic so reflexes aren't everything.  In the real world a cop or soldier with a good mind can usually out think the maniac with a gun just going out and shooting.  FPS' now a days though give the advantage to the maniac because of poor mechanics in using cover (Gears of war is much better though), most don't have much of a death penalty so their thought is (who cares if I die I'll just re-spawn), and a few other things.  If a dev evens out the game and makes it more realistic maybe instead of spawning with everything maybe you de-level 10 levels or revert back to level 1, or permadeath (I think this may be to drastic to have to make another character when you die).  I think if something like this is done you're going to see a lot of these maniacs will take things slow and use cover, and have to use strategy instead of just reflexes.  This and a few other things added could make a really good FPSMMO.

Originally posted by ShadowZERO

Basically i'm just asking for anyone/everyone's opinion who has wondered about the usage of the word.  I'll go first.

Grind - Any repetative task used to increase your character's overall level of power in an online game.

The only answers i'm asking you not to give are the ones that reference any specific games.  No "WoW is a grind because..." or "...and thats why EQ was a grind".  Those are wrong answers, I'm seeing who can define the word without using any games.

Bad grind is a repetitive tasks in an MMO, and you feel like you're just doing it over and over, because there aren't enough variety of missions to make it feel different.  BUT like I've said in other forums, every MMO is going to have a form of grind, it just depends on if there is enough variety to make it not feel like a grind.  Take a good FPS like say Call of Duty 4.  You have mulitple type of missions to keep your interest.  You have your regular run and kill missions, you have your C130 mission where you're bombing from above, you have your sniper mission and so on.  Its still a grind, but there are different types of missions and also there are different ways of doing the missions.  in your average MMO you go up to a mob and you click on it then click a number or function key to carry out the attack, then at that point it a roll of the dice.  In a good FPS, you can sneak up on someone, you can flank them, you can do a head shot to kill them and more.  The idea of a good game isn't to lessen the grind but to give more variety in the game, some spontaneity.

Originally posted by gillvane1

New styles of games add to your choices, they don't shrink your choices. Grindfests will always exist, because people like to play them. If developers start designing popular dynamic games, then we will have dynamic games, and grindfests. The RPG didn't make the FPS go away, or vice a versa. If a game type is popular, there will always be people that like to play it, and developers will always make them, so it's not an either or situation.

I agree with you on this.

MMORPGs are already dynamic, they are just not dynamic enough. Dynamic just means "change the game world for all players". You do that when you log into the game.. Where there used to be an empty space, now there is a hawt elf chick in plate mail armor standing there for any person in the game to see. The game world is changed for all players.

I guess if you look at it that way, maybe.

You also change the game world when you do quests. The quest is "bring me back 10 spider eggs and I will give you a reward." Killing the spiders doesn't change anything, because they just respawn. Collecting the spider eggs doesn't change anything, because you turn them in to the NPC and they disappear.

But, when you turn in the spider eggs you get a rusty dagger of crappiness! That rusty dagger didn't exist before, and now it does. You've changed the gameworld! Why? Because soon you will sell this rusty dagger of crappiness, in fact you might sell 100 rusty daggers of crappiness, and then you'll have so much extra money, you'll give it away to noobs, causing "mudflation". Certainly that changes the game world for everyone.

I agree with both of these statements.

But that's not the dynamic change we're looking for. The quest is "save the princess" and even though you save her and get a reward, she still needs saving, and the next player can save the same princess. That's what the rub is. IMO, that part isn't likely to change. It doesn't make sense to design a unique princess for each player in the game to save, does it?

Not design a unique princess for everyone but rather once someone saves her she doesn't need saving again.  Maybe later on in the game someone else may need saving, or maybe someone will try and kill the princess or succeed in killing the princess.  The whole idea would be once an NPC is dead its dead for good and another will take its place, but maybe the kingdom didn't like the way she was ruling so they had her killed so this other person can take her place.  Who knows maybe some other faction may not like how the new queen is ruling so maybe they will try and kill her, or maybe everyone is happy the way she rules so they don't try and kill her. 

However, we are seeing more dynamic features in MMORPGs. DAoC had Darkness Falls. Players could determine which faction had access to this dungeon by capturing Keeps. That changes the game for everyone.

Darkness Falls?  Never heard of that game.

And WAR will add more dynamic features as well, along those same lines.

Lets hope.

EVE has dynamic features too, because you can capture territory, and this changes the game world for everyone.

This is true.

So, we are seeing some progress in that direction. If Blizzard makes a more dynamic game, they won't be the first. But, like WoW they may improve on the existing model, and that would make for quite a fun game.

If the next Blizzard MMO is coming out in 2014 I sure hope you're right.  You made some valid points but I think the future of MMO's is going to be more like a good TV serial like Heros, or Lost, where everyone plays a part in a living world that changes.  The one thing I don't think will change is once a player dies they will come back.  I think they may come back as less of what they were before, maybe if they live to be level 40, they'll die and de-level to 30 or even 1 again.  I don't know if total permadeth will work because people won't want to keep making characters when they die, but if they still had the possibility of having the shell of their character and not have to re do their hair and face and such, it may work.  Or maybe it'll be like the game Shaiya where  you have the option later on to turn on permadeth.  Or they'll have specific servers for permadeth or semi permadeth.  Also I think mmos will be more dynamic like we're starting to see in FPS games now like blowing up buildings and such.  We'll see changing landscapes because of weather.  The a players choice to rob someone and kill them will change the game because maybe that NPC's husband or wife, or players friend will try and get revenge.  I see many changes in MMO's in the future.

MMORPG Maker

Originally posted by Scottc

If this happens, it'll be hilarious to tell the grindfags that no game will ever come out for them because grind is the past.

There are games that are coming out this year or next year that may have some of these factors.  W.E.L.L online for one, and Earthrise, and APB, if these games come out and are done well (no pun intended), we could have a form of dynamic game come out soon.  Now how dynamic will they be, fully or partially thats the question.  I hope we don't have to wait till 2014 that would be really sad.

I have a few ideas for dynamic games I've written down myself.

Originally posted by Camman321

 

Originally posted by GreenChaos

Team Fortress 2  - a fun as hell team based FPS.

Team Fortress 2 looks good, but for $30.00. Pretty spendy for not knowing how a game works, or how good it is. I don't understand what game owners problems are for not putting out free trials.

 

 

<Wait....knows....because if the person doesn't like the game, then they're stuck with it....(just a little rant)

 

Checking out Entropia :)- Thanks

Don't hold your breath on Darkfall...even if it does come out its probalby going to be a dog.