PART TWO - MMOPRG input - Endgame

[Hajo]

3. Letting the quests choose people - I agree with this too. I was thkinking instead of going to NPCs, what if NPCs got word to the player? For example, if you get your hacking skill up to 67% they might contact you to get you to help them crack a network they need to get into. Or if you have your drug design skill up to 95% a cult might contact you in order to help them make a drug with x,y,z effect. Definitely more immersive. Game choices should lead the player, not the other way around.

Will you go for randomly/programatically generated quests (generated to match the current situation of the game) or will they be scripted and just triggred by certain player achievements?

Both options look difficult to me. Programatically generated quest are often of low quality (story, background). Scripted quest are better, but in your design you'll need a raher large number of them, becuase you don't know which path the PC will take and you need quests for all possible paths.

 

[DarkSign]

@Fez you know youd think I would have...but no I played Dark Signs and BS Hacker so I decided not to buy uplink. Perhaps ill play it for research. What exactly did you like about it? Details man...gimme details.

@Hajo There will be both and the task will be Huge with an H. One of the things that Im trying to work on (one of the many) is coming up with a list of randomizable elements to make missions more unique.

For example, most MMOs merely randomize:

1) # of spawns
2) types of spawns

but I want expand that list

3) # of traps
4) skills required
5) doors to be lockpicked
6) bombs to be diffused
7) computers to be hacked
8) VIPs to escorted /killed
...the list goes on and on.

The hope is that by making a larger list and creating the right algorythym, that missions wont feel cookie-cutter. Feel free to add to the list. Ive got more, but I can always use even more. PA or Cyberpunk mission variables.

Of course just as many quests will be fixed from the beginning but will be "scripted" in that its a sequence of events that comes in waves. Guild Wars is trying to do this. For example you have to protect some high priest from waves of attackers (3 waves) then you have to escort him from one spot to another, and then you have some other activity. This is definitely something we want to do because it makes the NPC involved appear real...than just someone to hand 5000 coldain prayer shawls to.

And of course there will still be static quests. The key is for these to have the animations for the quest giver approach sim-realism. For example if you are supposed to find some junkie named Freebase, he could be warming his hands over a barrel fire or picking through junk for food...around the same area.

 

[Hajo]

@Hajo There will be both and the task will be Huge with an H. One of the things that Im trying to work on (one of the many) is coming up with a list of randomizable elements to make missions more unique.

For example, most MMOs merely randomize:

1) # of spawns
2) types of spawns

but I want expand that list

3) # of traps
4) skills required
5) doors to be lockpicked
6) bombs to be diffused
7) computers to be hacked
8) VIPs to escorted /killed
...the list goes on and on.

This makes a random map, but not a quest. I've been pondering how to generate random quests for quite a while, and the best I've seen so far is Joe Hewitts solution in GearHead.

What's your idea to make a quest of the random elements?

 

[DarkSign]

Ahh I get your distinction. I was speaking of a mission...which has only the value of the experience itself. You are speaking of quests which try to put a meaning to the action.

Im thinking this will definitely be hard to do since you are basically using a system to do creative writing for you.

Perhaps a system of needs, emotions, and results would yield a result. Something like

1. Pick a character or group of characters.
2. Pull from a list of their needs
3. Pick a quest giver
4. Have quest giver pick a player based on his skills and faction to give the quest to
5. Take needs and randomize the mission
6. Pull from a list of possible rewards - items, other quests, money...etc that only that group could give.

The hard/intensive part would be the filler text that q-giver speaks to the q-taker.
It would have to come from a bank of pre-written (duh) paragraphs that worked a bit like mad libs...i.e. inserting the variables in the text.

I think that if you could focus the variables around an evolving group of people or groups, and you made the needs - quest goals evolve - that the quest generation could be distributed with premade text. That is to say that the writing of the quest would be updated by the evolving needs of the quest-giver.

Does that make any sense?

 

[Hajo]

Ahh I get your distinction. I was speaking of a mission...which has only the value of the experience itself. You are speaking of quests which try to put a meaning to the action.
[...]
Does that make any sense?

Yes, but I see a lot of holes. Actually I tried to get you into writing another article for my library. The best one that I have on the topic is this one:

http://h-world.simugraph.com/pmwiki/pmw ... Generation

I hope this reading will compensate you for my trick

 

[DarkSign]

I didnt get the email. Resend to both locations. Im sorry man Id love to write for ya.

 

[Hajo]

I sent it again. Your office address (?) still bounces, your private (?) address gives no feedback, it seems it accepted the email.

You should have a PM from me in your inbox, since last Friday, with some details of the bounced mail - in case you or an admin of yours want toi take a look.

 

[Fez]

@Fez you know youd think I would have...but no I played Dark Signs and BS Hacker so I decided not to buy uplink. Perhaps ill play it for research. What exactly did you like about it? Details man...gimme details.

You should give the game or demo a go, it doesn't take too long for a play through. Actually I think it is an excellent game in general and another gem of indie design. It's kind of hard to explain without ending up with a review of Uplink, unless you've played it.

The plot of Uplink is able to play with or without your interaction, and the player is able to act out on it as much as s/he wants. If you refuse to partake in plot device points, the NPCs will go for it and take the job instead. In fact the whole game can play out if you sit there and watch the clock and once the end is reached you can carry on from the end doing the same normal work as the NPCs. I did it once just to see if it is true and it seemed very odd seeing the plot of the game play out from an outside perspective and reading how it went on news posts, rather than being the protagonist.

If you refuse to work for someone a mission is not left in limbo and is taken up by someone else, it gives it a feeling of being alive instead of just working through a missions list like in most SP games. An example is the hacking missions could involve anyone in the game world, even you. If a company had their database destroyed, they would put out a "revenge" mission asking someone to track down a hacker, or put you out of business more permanently by hacking your criminal record and having you arrested. This meant that sometimes it was possible to accept a mission and work your way through it, only to realise that you were hunting yourself, if you were not careful. Of course if you didn't take the mission, someone else would. That is why you had to cover your tracks and hope your skill would be better than the hunters, which would follow. You can also have events happen where your education records are modified or your back account robbed. I even had an NPC try to use one of my bank accounts to deposit stolen money from some sort of hacking raid on someone else. I spent it all and laughed, natch. But it was a great random moment and an example of how these situations emerge from fairly basic coding and a small overall size. The news posts boards and ranking systems reflected the goings on of the fake world, as people were arrested, or vanished or you improved.

Most the fans feel that the game would have made a superb multiplayer/MMOG game and I can see where they are coming from, it felt like you were part of a large number of normal people involved in a story, rather than being the CHOSEN ONE HERE TO SLAY THE FOOZLE. Similar to how a MMOG would make you feel.

Considering the simple interface I think it is a remarkable accomplishment that they made me feel involved at all. They knew what the limitations of their team were and they made a game to fit in with it perfectly.

There are so many ideas around to improve it I’d say it was a shame that they have no intention to make a sequel. I’d be very pleased if they did.

They ended up releasing a developer CD that includes design documents and betas of the game for anyone to play with, you might be interested in that too. I’ve heard it is worth the money.

I’ve probably missed something in there but feel free to prod me again for answers.

 

[Human Shield]

At the most basic, SP and Multiplayer games must have the same basis. If you cant at least say that I dont know what else to tell you. Said another way, just because 1000 people are all playing Splinter Cell at the same time, that doesnt make Sam Fisher any more or less of a hero. SP player games have cannon-fodder just like multi-players do. Sure there is no "chosen one" in an MMO, but everyone who plays FO saves the Vault.

They are very different and people should come to realize that.

The question is, WHY in SP games players are annoyed by repeating quests, while in MMOGs they intentionally seek out the fastest/easiest, and run them to death?
That's because in SP (at least, for most) - the process that is interesting, and completing the game is a secondary goal, often postponed as far as possible - think Fallout.
But in MMOGs, where competitive element is added, the result is what interests most.
It's ironic, really - in SP, people are willing to live in a game, but MMOGs, that are often referred as VR and VL - people take a large chunk of gameplay as an impediment before REAL fun starts - high-level PK, for instance.

This is what I've been getting at. Why do you think people want to buy high-level characters and items off ebay?

If you put a button in your game that maxed out your skills if you pushed it, how many people do you think would line up? You will never make the 'grind' so much fun that people will prefer to take it over skipping it. Now post cheat codes for Fallout and most will want to play through it normal without cheating.

You are basing a MMORPG experience on progressing your character over interacting with people.

Reduce free roaming monsters and static NPC vendors, it is the same as central planning in socialist countries and always leads to failure. Set up easy player-trading centers that people can dump their stuff and it goes to the highest bidder. Bring real competition between the players instead of competing for time efficiency against the game.

And that is their perogative. If they choose to have less fun to quicken the time they only cheat themselves. We will still strive to make fun gameplay for those that want to have fun.

Except now they are more powerful and maybe they can make money off selling their character. If the rush through their character is more powerful and now they have more influence in the gameworld and get to the magically "end-game" that is designed to be more fun instead of repeating things.

No dear you missed the point. The point is that you can play something thats repetitious and have fun at it. He was answering your point that circular gameplay was dumb and boring. Rounds of CS prove that. And there are 100000s of servers that prove that people like that.

1. They get it for free.
2. Rushing through doesn't make them more powerful and give them more influence.
3. Game doesn't change after 500th game, no special "end-game" with more stuff.

Not true if there are money draws out of the economy. Draws like paying for repairs, paying for cities, paying for items. Now the net worth of the world can go up as more items remain in the word, but thats a far cry from inflation. They key is managing the drops and the economy. Its not for sure that static (a word I see you hate) drops and spawns will ruin the econ.

Central planning for the economy always fails, put free trade and scarcity in the game.

Again, imagine if you inserted 1000 fun SP games where the MMO quests are. That means it wouldnt be a grind because while it may be repetitious, it wouldnt be fun.

Do you mean it would be fun?

And people will want to skip them all up to the last one. Have people START on the last and only step.

Unfortunatley he's right. If you havent done an end-game EQ raid of 200 people or a 300 person ShadowBane seige you are missing a lot. Not enough that you cant have an opinion...i definitely like having you keep us honest, and interesting....but hes right that theres a lot more than beta.

Again, pay money and grind until you get to the "real game". Have all players in the same mode.

I agree. But in our game it wont be a grind. At least the attempt is to change that.

If people will prefer to skip it all you need to ask yourself if it is worth putting in. Put a button in the middle of town to max out everything and see what people will choose between, the end-game and having "fun" going through the early steps.

No, player interaction is better then fighting through infinite monsters.

Agreed, though both have their place.

Then design a real game and put a VR room where they can fight monsters with no benefit and see how crowded it gets. They fight infinite monsters for progress and as long as the world is designed around that, player interaction will be a far second.

It should have an effect, having players respawn with all their stuff and having it not matter at all is useless.

Agreed again, though too much of burden can make it un-fun.

But won't they be overjoyed if they lose everything and have go play through your amazingly fun game all over again!!! Shouldn't no one care if they get killed because your special grinding is so much fun? People don't mind dieing in CS.

Where is the burden from? Players either enjoy playing all steps of your game equally or they don't.

Base the game on player interaction (not grinding for levels) and permenant death with full looting becomes lessened. Don't have new characters repeat anything!!

I want to go straight from character creation to being a good guard hire for the most vetern player merchant without having to kill any monsters. I want to be useful from the start, I want to start in the end-game and have it be the only game. If I die I start the game over and it is fresh each time interacting with people in different ways instead of going back to killing monster #1.

Agreed our game will start players with decent skills in most things that a normal pa person would be...i.e. gun skills. Adding to your skills will turn you into more of an expert...not bring you up to functionality.

As I said before...HS..keep the ideas coming. Keeps us honest.

Depends on how much progress can be made and how fast, how important items are and how money is made. If money (gained out of the air by killing monsters or repeating quests) becomes the new XP the grind continues.

 

[Human Shield]

Perhaps a system of needs, emotions, and results would yield a result. Something like

1. Pick a character or group of characters.
2. Pull from a list of their needs
3. Pick a quest giver
4. Have quest giver pick a player based on his skills and faction to give the quest to
5. Take needs and randomize the mission
6. Pull from a list of possible rewards - items, other quests, money...etc that only that group could give.

This goes back to trying to centrally plan everything.

1. Have players control a character
2. Give that character needs
3. Have the character look for people to meet those needs
4. Have other character have needs
5. Have both players figure how to meet both needs
6. Have trade happen and both benefit
7. Have players specialize in what they do best and set up trade network

Now supply and demand and competition come and in and things grow instead of staying stagnate with NPCs. Will the AI be able to keep up with all innovation? Be able to find the player willing to do it the cheapest? Be able to balance their own budget? Be able to find ways to serve other players better?

MMORPGs need less dumb AI.

 

[Avé]

You keep expounding on grinding & end-game, when you admit you havent tried any MMORPG outside beta.

 

[Balor]

Ok, while it pains me to say so, but Human Shield is right. It's in human nature, and no denying to that.
So, how to prevent players from seeing grind as an obstacle... while not forgetting players who LOVE the process of perfecting their character? After all, while Human Shield is right about grind, he do overlook this strata of players... and it's not that small.
After all, if we are to, simply, remove the skills and stats from the game - we'll end up with UT2kN gameplay... and why do we need another Tournament, even in PA setting?
But, for grind haters, I've come up with another idea:
Age-varying backgrounds! Nice and simple.
You can start off as already aged (like, 30 or so) man, with a certain profession, social standing (like, wife and kids ) and rather well-developed skills - according to profession, and an appropriate set of eq.
Nothing uber, but more then enough to survive and compete at PK (especially in large groups)
Or you start as a young kid, with very few skills... but possibility to get them higher then 'premade' character when you reach same age, and a free-style gameplay.
And a lot of options in-between, with varying ages and professions.
Customization will take place by setting your skill affinities, stat potentials, traits and Talents.
Here is more indepth look on ages:

• 
  a. Young age: late teens - late twenties.
  High learning, but high forgetting speed. Fast training of stats. The earlier you start, the lesser skills/stats you'll gain at the beginning according to your background, but, possibly, a few more traits.
  
  b. Middle years: from thirty to late forties:
  Learning and training speed slow down considerably. Same goes to forgetting. You should be in your peak form by now.
  
  c. "Endgame" period
  Characters will start to lose their skills (slow) and stats (faster), eventually becoming unsuited for combat (that they can switch to something less violent... or just retire and start anew).

The gametime/playtime ratio will have to require careful balancing, but that's details.
Also, again, this way, permadeath option is feasible... but, of course, there should be some limits:
1. Make only a few servers permadeath - like Diablo hardcore.
2. Make most ‘advanced’ backgrounds available from the beginning only on ‘casual’ and ‘hardcore’ server. Perhaps, some kind of ‘ultra-hardcore’ server can be founded, with permadeath and no advanced backgrounds.
3. Make game track gameplay time and general progress when you play. If you die too often, you will be presented with less prestigious backgrounds, perhaps with high enough skills, but lacking eq (so you cannot spam-die to generate it). But if you’ll live a long life and retire, you’ll end up with some elite background choices, or extra Talents, or somesuch. And you don’t have to actively grind for it - just play, survive long enough and you’ll eventually get one. Of course, it should not be something you cannot attain by simply playing, but nice enough anyway.

 

[Balor]

Assorted ideas:
A bit about stats:
I've already mentioned (and you agreed) that stat potentials should be different for different persons. (And btw, like it was in Evil Islands (if rather rudimentally), it should affect your outlook in a obvious way.)
So, why not make stats progress like skills? I mean, from 0% (well, that's newborn baby ) to 100% - your peak form, cannot get any higher.
What you can actually do at your peak form depends on your starting potential with the stat, + traits, perks, Talents, etc.
It will be even better to hide the percentages altogether, adding brief text descriptions.
The less numbers in are your character sheet, the more you feel like a person, not walking function n->∞.
Starting percentages will depend on your background, like 30% for beginner characters, and about 80% for ‘advanced backgrounds’ prime stats.
Since no absolute value would be visible, it player will have to resort to IC measures (like wrestling to find out who is stronger) more often, not just telling “I have 20 STR”.
Stats that cannot be readily advanced should be traits, and stat like Wisdom should not be present at all, since it’s all up to player. Willpower - perhaps, Wisdom - no way.
About skills:

Make most major skills consist of different sub-skills.
Like, not just shooting - but Shooting, Sniping, Gunfighting (ripped that off from E5, but it’s a good idea nonetheless), not just science - but Physics, Chemistry, Math, etc.

A bit more about weapons:
Make player to ‘get used to’ a certain weapon, to get the most out of it. Again, taken from E5 (which is taken from Ja2 ).

About items:
Make repairing items not just ‘magically’ hammering and getting it back whole.
The repairing process much take spare parts, otherwise it’s not repairing, but cleaning and polishing (sharpening).
Like, your gun can accumulate dust and sand, you clean it - and it’s back in full shape.
But worn springs and metal fatigue from too much shooting cannot be repaired - only replaced with other parts.
That’ll give crafters producing item parts a lot of work and stable income. Also will balance situation with crafted uber-gear.

 

[DarkSign]

They are very different and people should come to realize that.

They are different but you cant even admit that they have some similarities. I at least can admit that they are different. This means ME > you.

This is what I've been getting at. Why do you think people want to buy high-level characters and items off ebay?

Yes. And my point is that you can admit that SP game play is fun...it doesnt instantly become UNFUN because its multiplayer. Put the fun parts of a SP game in an MMO you can use them to your advantage. You seem willing to win at all costs in this argument and dont concede one point.

You will never make the 'grind' so much fun that people will prefer to take it over skipping it. Now post cheat codes for Fallout and most will want to play through it normal without cheating.

Well of course you wont make 'the grind' more fun. But you can make gameplay more fun. You sound like the other MMO-hating codexers.

Reduce free roaming monsters and static NPC vendors, it is the same as central planning in socialist countries and always leads to failure. Set up easy player-trading centers that people can dump their stuff and it goes to the highest bidder. Bring real competition between the players instead of competing for time efficiency against the game.

Ive already said that I will reduce static monsters and static NPCs. Your little comment about socialist countries only goes so far. It will be hard to come up with a P-A believable world-spanning trade system. Perhaps I can find a storyline way around it...or bypass that all together and put it outside the story.

Except now they are more powerful and maybe they can make money off selling their character. If the rush through their character is more powerful and now they have more influence in the gameworld and get to the magically "end-game" that is designed to be more fun instead of repeating things.

Hmm. Perhaps power-grinding might lead to more pvp power, but there's no way around that. Some people will play more than others. There's always a forced level max per hour system, but eventually new people will come to the game and be overpowered anyway.

1. They get it for free.
2. Rushing through doesn't make them more powerful and give them more influence.
3. Game doesn't change after 500th game, no special "end-game" with more stuff.

You're changing the subject. He was responding to you when you said that repetitious content couldnt be fun.

Central planning for the economy always fails, put free trade and scarcity in the game.

it doesnt always fail (depends on your failure parameters - real life is different).
ive always had free trade and scarcity in the game.

Do you mean it would be fun?

And people will want to skip them all up to the last one. Have people START on the last and only step.

1. Yes I meant would be.
2. You cant start at the last step otherwise there would be no character progression and otherwise there would be nothing to look forward to.

I am making the game so that anyone has decent skills right out of the box. And pretty much their wont be raid style stuff that you cant get to in the beginning. Now as far as building up your towns and getting to the server-wide end game...you have to earn that and the process of getting there...and all that entails wont be handed to anyone right at the beginning.

Just dropping a game as is and saying..woot...this is all there is...no matter how much content you have or what the circular process is...is nuts. Humans love episodic content. We crave meaning brought by experience filtered through understanding.

Again, pay money and grind until you get to the "real game". Have all players in the same mode.

Again that wasnt the point. The point being made was that you have a limited capacity for judging something you havent fully played.

If people will prefer to skip it all you need to ask yourself if it is worth putting in. Put a button in the middle of town to max out everything and see what people will choose between, the end-game and having "fun" going through the early steps.

Again...time and achievement are worth effort, despite power-gamers. But I agree that to make a change in the genre, it has to be accessible from the get-go.

No, player interaction is better then fighting through infinite monsters.

Agreed, though both have their place.

Where is the burden from? Players either enjoy playing all steps of your game equally or they don't.

Thats not true havent you disliked a particular part of the game while still loving it? I could pull up a thousand posts where people say that all the time.

Base the game on player interaction (not grinding for levels) and permenant death with full looting becomes lessened. Don't have new characters repeat anything!!

I want to go straight from character creation to being a good guard hire for the most vetern player merchant without having to kill any monsters. I want to be useful from the start, I want to start in the end-game and have it be the only game. If I die I start the game over and it is fresh each time interacting with people in different ways instead of going back to killing monster #1.

You really have me here. I mean...I agree with that immensely. In fact, I agree so much and Ive been hit by reading that...that Im wondering if we shouldnt just allow players to pick their whole template from the beginning...and allow them to change it as they feel free to in the game. Kind of a..."this is who my char was before he came into the game" kind of thing.

This would eliminate leveling (which was already out)...and then if you wanted to change your skills based on what you used...you could.

Thoughts anyone? anyone?


@ balor - i do like the idea of stats changing over time as well. Neocron does it and it makes sense. So if you started using a big gun or melee weapons your STR would raise ver time...but perhaps your int would go down.

>>Age-varied backgrounds...had a RADICAL idea. What if a player could choose the age of his character...which would affect his stats (int str ..etc)...but the trade off for worse stats was higher starting %s in skills? I mean vets have better shooting skills, but they arent as fast. Ideas?thoughts?

EDIT: I just realized I hadnt read your whole post before I posted something very similar! Im liking this idea...not sure how the MMO community would take it though.

 

[Avé]

What exactly is grinding?

Killing the exact same mobs repeatedly to level?

Do you have to do it for a certain length of time for it to be grinding?


I appreciated hunting(PVE'ing) in neocron, it was fun, varied and it encouraged teaming.

My clan owned an outpost in the best levelling zone in the game, there were usually 2-5 of us spread out in the zone npc'ing, and since it was a lab op, we always had someone researching there(it gave a bonus to research) to level up via tradeskills.

The feeling of having our own zone, and knowing that if you got in trouble, help was half a minute away was great.

I levelled/helped level at least 16 characters from start to cap in that game, and PPU'ed(defense only class, can buff newbies to help them power level) for at least 60 other people in 18 months.

In short, I loved PVE'ing in that game, I loved helping people PVE, and especially, I loved going to exotic locations(graves, chaos caves, batqueen) and hunting as a team.

The only grinding in that game, was for tertiary skills, like intelligence on monks, but the vast majority of players enjoyed levelling, and wouldnt call it a grind.


Saying that being able to hunt NPC mobs is always grinding, no matter the circumstances, no matter the alternatives, and most importantly, NO MATTER HOW ENJOYABLE it is, just shows your complete and total ignorance of MMOG's.


From all your posts, it really does sound like, all you want is a single player game with thousands of other people being able to play.

 

[Sol Invictus]

I hate games that don't allow you to level alone. There's times when players just want to be alone and not have to rely on and deal with the common stupidity of others to advance. DarkSign, I hope your game is friendly towards 'single player gamers', like WOW was, before they turned it into EQ-lite.

The argument that MMORPGs should only be about cooperative gameplay makes me sick. Players should be able to play how they like and not be forced into party roles. I propose that you destroy the element of the "Holy Trinity" - the Healer, Damage Dealer and Tank or Priest, Mage and Warrior. The whole idea of this was stupid from the moment EverQuest invented it and MMORPGs have been horrible ever since. Hybrid classes are either too powerful or completely worthless in parties. My suggestion is to either get rid of classes or to allow for personal hybridization in the same way that Guild Wars allows you to define your character based on his main class, subclass, and all of the skills you can pick.

The way Guild Wars does it, you can only have 8-10 so skills at any given time so your character is defined by his skills rather than his class. A Ranger who selects mainly beast-training skills is vastly different from a ranger with Marksmanship skills. A ranger with marksmanship and air spells (which deal stun-related damage for the most part) is played a lot differently than a ranger with marksmanship and fire spells (which are AOE/support based). The hybridization is maximized, and although certain imbalances may exist, they can be prevented by making each and every spell equally as useful in its own place. Some spells might be more useful as back up to a certain class than others, for example. Some spells, which are extraordinarely more useful than others, are given 'Elite' status, and only one Elite spell may be equipped at any given time, so you can't have two extraordinarily powerful spells at your disposal.

Another suggestion, if I may, is to propose instanced areas. Frankly I am quite sick of those MMORPGS, watching monsters respawn, and watching hundreds of players clustered in a single 'levelling spot' killing every monster that respawns. It completely kills the immersion and makes you realize the level treadmilling/grind that goes on. Griefing is annoying, as is spawn camping and chest camping. Powerful rewards SHOULD NOT be in such open areas, because all it does is create too much room for griefing and spawn camping. I don't like the idea of waiting 24 hours to have a chance at the powerful weapon just because somebody killed it before I did. Games should be about instant gratification, and as a casual gamer I just don't have the time for shit like that. Most casual gamers stick to offline games, games like Guild Wars, or 'newbie friendly' MMOs like World of Warcraft, because it allows them to play the game at their own pace without forcing them to wait and play for hours upon hours before they can get any enjoyment from it.

Powerful rewards (if there are any) should be instanced, and while getting through the instance may require a TEAM to do so, I dont think people will mind that. It's a much better alternative to camping a spawn spot and having some guy grief you.

 

[Avé]

I hate games that don't allow you to level alone. There's times when players just want to be alone and not have to rely on and deal with the common stupidity of others to advance. DarkSign, I hope your game is friendly towards 'single player gamers', like WOW was, before they turned it into EQ-lite.

The argument that MMORPGs should only be about cooperative gameplay makes me sick. Players should be able to play how they like and not be forced into party roles. I propose that you destroy the element of the "Holy Trinity" - the Healer, Damage Dealer and Tank or Priest, Mage and Warrior. The whole idea of this was stupid from the moment EverQuest invented it and MMORPGs have been horrible ever since. Hybrid classes are either too powerful or completely worthless in parties. My suggestion is to either get rid of classes or to allow for personal hybridization in the same way that Guild Wars allows you to define your character based on his main class, subclass, and all of the skills you can pick.

The way Guild Wars does it, you can only have 8-10 so skills at any given time so your character is defined by his skills rather than his class. A Ranger who selects mainly beast-training skills is vastly different from a ranger with Marksmanship skills. A ranger with marksmanship and air spells (which deal stun-related damage for the most part) is played a lot differently than a ranger with marksmanship and fire spells (which are AOE/support based). The hybridization is maximized, and although certain imbalances may exist, they can be prevented by making each and every spell equally as useful in its own place. Some spells might be more useful as back up to a certain class than others, for example. Some spells, which are extraordinarely more useful than others, are given 'Elite' status, and only one Elite spell may be equipped at any given time, so you can't have two extraordinarily powerful spells at your disposal.

Another suggestion, if I may, is to propose instanced areas. Frankly I am quite sick of those MMORPGS, watching monsters respawn, and watching hundreds of players clustered in a single 'levelling spot' killing every monster that respawns. It completely kills the immersion and makes you realize the level treadmilling/grind that goes on. Griefing is annoying, as is spawn camping and chest camping. Powerful rewards SHOULD NOT be in such open areas, because all it does is create too much room for griefing and spawn camping. I don't like the idea of waiting 24 hours to have a chance at the powerful weapon just because somebody killed it before I did. Games should be about instant gratification, and as a casual gamer I just don't have the time for shit like that. Most casual gamers stick to offline games, games like Guild Wars, or 'newbie friendly' MMOs like World of Warcraft, because it allows them to play the game at their own pace without forcing them to wait and play for hours upon hours before they can get any enjoyment from it.

Powerful rewards (if there are any) should be instanced, and while getting through the instance may require a TEAM to do so, I dont think people will mind that. It's a much better alternative to camping a spawn spot and having some guy grief you.

Excellent, I knew you had it in you to be intelligent, logical and reasonable :wink:

Instancing is the way to go in MMOG's, as are fully customisable skills & statistics, rather then set in stone character classes.

What I would suggest for instancing is, have normal vanilla generic area's & mobs for hunting, but have specific area's where PVE'ing is instanced.

Examples would be complexes in Eve, buildings in CoH, or in Neocron, if each time you entered the chaos cave/swamp caves/graves/batqueen, the area was instanced for your team.

 

[Balor]

Human Shield Vs Ave - that's what I meant about Human Shield being right, but forgetting a large strata of players.
Concerning Exitium's post:
Btw, I, myself, don't like grouping too - I'm rather solitary person. I do enjoy a good company... but my definition of good company usually drastically differ from you get by herding a few typical players together, unfortunately. And while I agree that leveling in a group is more effective and fun (for some), I'd say that 'single-player' types should also get their chance.
About 'respawn spots'.
I say that it is a corrupt practice, and agree with every word Exitium said about it.
So, why not go Fallout/Daggerfall-style, and make a travelable world map, with all kinds of random encounters (on random-generated maps, the type would depend on the terrain you travel right now)? In certain areas chances to stumble on a certain beast or whatever would rise (provided it was not yet hunted into extinction), or even special encounters, 1/1000000 variety, with extra rare items and mobs (really rewarding provided you can take first from the second - think those golden gecko caves with a guardian robot).
That will allow much more freedom in allowing players to establish private houses and
even settlements.
Of cource, there should be numerous static locations (like settlements) and other points of interest. Btw, this way it's much easier to seamlessly integrate more content - just expand the world map, or add a few 'static' locations (or random encounter types) there and there.
Will provide a great deal of control over spawn rates too, and much more realistic then just 'turning off' static spawn locations.
Btw, that will give explorer types a lot of good work - to continually scout the overmap, mapping the ever-migrating herds of animals (both dangerous - to avoid, and somehow useful - to hunt... or vice versa ), bandit activity, etc. Such maps will have to be regularly updated, therefore they will never run out of business.

 

[Ortchel]

The argument that MMORPGs should only be about cooperative gameplay makes me sick. Players should be able to play how they like and not be forced into party roles. I propose that you destroy the element of the "Holy Trinity" - the Healer, Damage Dealer and Tank or Priest, Mage and Warrior. The whole idea of this was stupid from the moment EverQuest invented it and MMORPGs have been horrible ever since. Hybrid classes are either too powerful or completely worthless in parties. My suggestion is to either get rid of classes or to allow for personal hybridization in the same way that Guild Wars allows you to define your character based on his main class, subclass, and all of the skills you can pick.

Ditto. I'm a big time soloer and I'd never play an MMO that didn't let me play alone. I just renewed my Star Wars Galaxies account and I've done real well because of the way it's skill system works. You can master multiple professions without getting stuck in an 'archetype'. I'm a ranger and an unarmed specialist. As a ranger I can conceal myself around hostile mobs and only engage those that I'm able to defend myself against, which makes soloing considerably easier. In addition, as an unarmed specialist, I gain damage mitigation bonuses, effectively 'absorbing' the damage that would ordinarily fall on a 'tank'. For all of SWG's flaws, this is a great, incredibly flexible system that I'd love to see more games implement.

To get an idea of how it works, check out this site. It emulates the 'skill tree' in SWG. Might give you some good ideas, DarkSign.

 

[DarkSign]

Exit and I agree? Wow. j/k

I definitely agree that this game should be single-player friendly. You mentioned Guild Wars - they do something else I want to add in an expansion - i.e. bring along AI teammates who round out your party.

Id really like to mix JA2 and Rainbox Six in a way - the idea of going and hiring mercs with certain skills based on the jobs you know you need to do...and then perhaps controlling them when you take them into an instanced mission.

Thats not to say you would NEED to hire them...the game would be soloable...but Id love to give you the option.

As far as the holy trinity...consider it DEAD. Now...the problem is coming up with a fun and semi realistic way to play the medical person in a p-a game. I mean I had thought of the tech side person being able to apply nanites - but thats too scifi. I need something that works in a half Mad Max present day and half-Bladerunner future day.

Any ideas?

I had thought of using proximity...so youd have to be so close to the player that needs medical attention to bandange his wounds....and then have several levels of skill...but again...I didnt come up with anything spectacular...anyone???

I never played WW2 online...how do they do it?

 

[DarkSign]

I just realized that Im reinventing the healer...perhaps I shouldnt. Make people just rely on stimpaks?? Thoughts?

 

[Fez]

Just using stimpaks and kits would be good. At a pinch maybe NPC only medics.

 

[Balor]

For 'healing on the fly' - stimpacks galore.
For bandaging wounds - a bit of 'First Aid' skill is rather important for anyone in a harsh setting.
For operating serious injuries - well, that's different stuff. But only if injury system, like one I proposed, will be implemented, or at least something close to it - like in SS, for instance.
Setting broken bones right, taking out lodged bullets, treating deep burns from lazers - that's doctor's job... and besides, getting your wound sewed is much cheaper then getting it regenerated with a stimpack... if not as fast, but for ‘post-combat’ treatment it’s not as important... and besides, sewing it and THEN using a stim is much more effective anyway.
And there are a few fields that a doctor would be really important:
1. To counter biological weapon effects (those are a bit deadlier then common cold or indigestion)
2. To implant implants (lol, oily oil.. oh well).
3. To surgically remove adverse effects from mutations.
4. Plastical surgery (a bit like the 3rd)
5. Actual creation of all the medicines (stimpacks included). Require knowledge both in medicine and chemistry.
Of cource, like Fez suggested, that can be performed by NPCs or robodocs... but why not allow players this as well? After all, some may just like being a doctor.
Btw, no nanotech? Hmm, ok. Nanotech is too powerful to be interesting anyway. You'll see that in a few years .

 

[Fez]

If you allow doctor classes you end up with everyone being obligated to drag one along in every group. Just put everyone on equal footing, stimpaks, etc.

 

[Balor]

Obligated? Not at all. Like I mentioned, a bit of first aid and a heap of stimpacks would be enough.
But to have someone with a good set of medical skills and equipment would be better, since stimpacks are bound to be expensive, and (in case of more developed injury system) will not heal your broken bones... or they will, but improperly healed bone is NOT something you'd like to have. (But, well, you don't have to be one hell of a doctor to fix that)
And, like I said, someone must make those stimpacks, antidotes and contraceptives, right?
It can be more then possible to HAVE doctors, but it will not be obligatory to have one in each party. Not obligatory, but a smart thing to do. That's what people do when they go to dangerous trips, or in the army. One should protest against illogical parts of the game that break immersion - like respawning monsters Exitium mentioned, not doctors.
And besides, if you'll plan your action in a way you'll not get hurt, you'll never need a doctor at all .
Oh, btw, what you should protest is a direct translation of 'priests' into 'surgeons'.
'Magically' healing wounds of a 'tank' taking hits... we'll I agree, that's rather disgusting. But, so much as I recall, Dark promised to eliminate tanking as well? (Btw, with ranged combat being more widespread, it'll happen 'by itself' anyway). And besides, who forbids a medic to learn a bit marksmanship and carry a carbine? It's not AD&D, for God's sake.