I can only hope that a developer who really cares for Fallout and the universe it’s based in gets the license. I don’t want to see the game cheapened in order for someone to just “make a buck†or go with the prevailing trend of console gaming. I think a massively multiplayer online version of Fallout would be nice.
I think it's funny that Deiley removed himself from that list of developers with the latter two sentences.
I think I now know who was responsible for the multitude of unbelievably idiotic and naive pipe dreams about FOOL posted at NMA by drive-by posters, while others went to the defense of such garbage. It fits around the same time the title was said to have been into consideration, so I have my suspicions. The funniest one was pointing out how the world map and condensing time couldn't be taken into consideration. We had to go back to "A train leaves from St. Louis and travels at 40 MPH to Denver..." to educate those poor morons.
Then the spin doctor for shit design has to open his mouth to make for more comedy gold.
Exponential Boy said:
I think you guys are being a bit harsh on the poor guy.
David, stop right there. You're already laughed at because you give poor excuses as to why you've not learned how to design in complex methods. You don't need to make yourself more of a...damn, I'm too late.
He didn't necessarily mean "I think Fallout would make a cool MMORPG if done like every other MMORPG out there right now"
If he didn't, then he would have come up with some way of differentiating the concept. Saying that "I think a Fallout MMORPG would be a great idea!" only gives one clear impression and it's not too difficult for most people to piece that together. At least, I hope it isn't.
Welcome to basic communication. You suck at it, we know. Now go sniveling away from this thread or come up with another copout reply. You're nothing but predictable with the excuses. It, in fact, makes for a far more suitable nickname for yourself.
...it's not impossible that you could have a gritty and realistic game of that type if you had certain things in it like permanent death and so forth.
That is charming, but to those who have played and designed MMORPGs, you've just pointed out yourself a complete ignoramus that tries to partake in the discussion to try and get back some credibility. Let me give you a little bit of advice. Stop trying, you're just digging yourself in deeper.
The first part that makes me consider you an idiot to presume to post about such a topic in your ignorant state would be the "realistic game". When you have to allow for thousands of people to be able to do the same thing, you've watered down the ability for any single event to chance anything significant in the world. If you make it for just a couple of people, then it is wasted effort and/or leads to message board discussions about favoritism and other such drama bullshit.
Of course that's how you develop, David, so then are you presuming to claim to be so great, O Mastar of teh Fed-Ex? It doesn't take much to see how you fail to realize how a post-apocalyptic world wouldn't really resemble such anymore when put into a MMO environ (unless you count SWG), and you want to call yourself a designer? Clannies do seem to be your cuppa, so I'm not surprised there, either.
It's just unlikely that such a game would get made because of the entrenched notion of what a MMORPG game has to include in order to be successful.
Not just a notion, but apparently, what sells if done to the point of combining the gameplay most want. They often pick the best-looking clone, and I doubt I have to point out the stigma of using licensed material. While
A Tale in the Desert might be brilliant in some ways in multiplayer gameplay, it isn't enough of what the market wants in order to make it wildly attractive.
So you'd either have an unprofitable niche game, which is great for a SMALL development studio with their own intellectual property, or one that doesn't have much semblence to the setting or original gameplay but does draw people in to play.
One of the important parts of
See many old Origin people there at Origin? No, most were ousted by EA because the publisher didn't care about single-player games from them anymore, they only became interested in the money.
So, to draw that parallel, BioWare goes into the MMORPG market, does successful, and ends up a shell of what it used to be. The employees and founders are no longer there, and you're at some lesser company that hired you. Then you get to watch as the work you so lovingly created is mercilessly skullfucked. Then watch as a half-ass sequel to the series is released to put a final insult onto your work. Ask a real developer, MCA about this sometime concerning Jefferson. At least he admits his mistakes.
I have to give a sincere "go fuck yourself" for posting something so utterly naive that it prompts me to have to do an essential part of your job. You might like living in your own world, but if you aren't going to learn from easily seen mistakes, then that makes you an idiot. That is, unless you are too young or too new to the gaming industry to have remembered what happened to Ultima. At which I have to say, no excuses. You can learn how to do your job, Excuse Boy.
I for one, think that the Shadowrun setting is one that would lend itself well to a MMORPG game, but only if done right. But it'd more likely be a travesty so I honestly hope one never materializes.
Whoa, is that some small spark of a clue gleaming in your eye or am I mistaken?
The only way that projects like this could be handled well are in small scale, with a small user base. At that point, you might as well make a single or co-op game.
The only purpose for the Massive part in the name is to indicate it's for a large amount of players. A large amount of players leads to problems with the design and the design leaning heavily towards simplistic. Some things can be done to alleviate the problem with the sterile world, but on a whole it is
exponentially more dry than a single-player game in steps.
You start with a single-player game and have the world/setting/NPCs react to the various ways a player decides to play. They die, game over.
Factor in another person and you have to add in more things like handling quests for more than one person, changing the text (unless you wrote it "party based" to begin with, which tends to suck ass when playing a single-player mode). You would have to change a number of items and add in a lot more (networking protocols, etc.). The players go from being the protagonist to being part of the group. Anyone dies, a res is given.
The next big step is when you go from a party or two to making it playable for indefinitely more players. Quests are watered down even more, and the speech is the same for nearly every person, the world also has to be balanced and made so that nobody could get rich quick nor could you really find a large cache of really useful stuff. Move out of the way, there's a line. The player now is one of a number of identical other people and is treated like a number. Someone dies, a crowd laughs.
Please note the correct use of "exponentially" there.
That could have been what the fellow had in mind, you don't know that... he didn't have the chance to elaborate on the topic after all. If such was the case the worst he can be accused of is overly hopeful naivete.
Sorry, but I fail to see how "overly hopeful naivete" is much of a change from "overly hopeful naivete", which is exactly what people have been saying. You just had to come in and go for the "birds of a feather" pity approach.
Without any quantification or qualification, then there is a clear meaning. Pathetic excuses and dodges based on "lack of evidence" are moot compared to such matters like "the basics of conversation".
Though I would have to agree the idea of a regular MMORPG Fallout is pretty shudder-worthy. Nice spoof there, incidentally.
It's funny when you get down the the "regular" aspect of what you're trying to say. It is almost as if you're trying to make it sound like it can be developed for individuals. MMOG devs are desperately trying to give a bit more need for grouping or requiring player interaction in recent titles, but the methods they are using are quite absurd most of the time, asinine in others.
Rule one of MMOGs, there is no individual. What one can do thousands will. That's the price you pay for making it "massive". You can make something special, or make it templated and like a turnstile. You can't do both, and you can't do one of those in a MMORPG.
On the world, who are you? You are essentially nobody. The difference between the real world and the game world is that some people feel better for knocking down ten rats to get to the next level. Pity that such feats, including learning important lessons in game development, can't be duplicated in real life, eh? They, like you, are still nothing special as there's plenty of other level 2s around.
-Rosh
Level 90 PK Asshole
