Options

Do you think this is as far as MMORPGs will evolve?

123468

Posts

  • Options
    mrflippymrflippy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    DevilGuy wrote: »
    4. I still don't like the idea of losing anything just because someone else managed to kill me.
    A: They fucking killed you! what else do you want? do they need to come to your house and hack your machine before you acknowledge that maybe they outsmarted you and maybe you need to get a little wiser to hold on to your shit? Its not like any smart player would be left assetless by getting killed.
    I think that the disconnect here is that some people really don't like others being able to kill them and take their stuff or cause them to lose something. It's not that they didn't realize that they got outsmarted or that they just suddenly realized, "Oh, man, maybe I should be more careful!" No, they just don't want it to happen in the first place.

    mrflippy on
  • Options
    SzechuanosaurusSzechuanosaurus Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited December 2007
    mrflippy wrote: »
    DevilGuy wrote: »
    4. I still don't like the idea of losing anything just because someone else managed to kill me.
    A: They fucking killed you! what else do you want? do they need to come to your house and hack your machine before you acknowledge that maybe they outsmarted you and maybe you need to get a little wiser to hold on to your shit? Its not like any smart player would be left assetless by getting killed.
    I think that the disconnect here is that some people really don't like others being able to kill them and take their stuff or cause them to lose something. It's not that they didn't realize that they got outsmarted or that they just suddenly realized, "Oh, man, maybe I should be more careful!" No, they just don't want it to happen in the first place.

    Which is fair enough, they can play something else. For better or for worse (better imo) EvE's gameplay virtually revolves around the fragility of property.

    Szechuanosaurus on
  • Options
    DevilGuyDevilGuy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    mrflippy wrote: »
    DevilGuy wrote: »
    4. I still don't like the idea of losing anything just because someone else managed to kill me.
    A: They fucking killed you! what else do you want? do they need to come to your house and hack your machine before you acknowledge that maybe they outsmarted you and maybe you need to get a little wiser to hold on to your shit? Its not like any smart player would be left assetless by getting killed.
    I think that the disconnect here is that some people really don't like others being able to kill them and take their stuff or cause them to lose something. It's not that they didn't realize that they got outsmarted or that they just suddenly realized, "Oh, man, maybe I should be more careful!" No, they just don't want it to happen in the first place.
    I fully understand that, I used to think that way myself, when I played wow, I played on a PvE server, even bfore battlegrounds and even world PvP was rewarded, I figured I'd rather control when I wanted to PvP. I was acting like a pussy though, when I played EvE it forced me to change my playstyle, and it made me realize that the risk involved added a dimension that wasn't there before, simply put if there's no risk why even bother?

    it's not like theres a challenge, trust me there isn't, it's all just a grind to get as far as you can for no purpose unless you can put what you have on the line for whatever motivates you.

    DevilGuy on
  • Options
    Ant000Ant000 Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Man skimming this thread just completely reinforces the idea that Asheron's Call, specifically Darktide the PVP server, was sooo ahead of its time in terms of combat, politics and other emergent gameplay, risk/reward, player skill -- all that jazz. Good times.

    I honestly think that one thing that would be great for MMORPG's is huge maps. I'm thinking 20+ hours for a player to walk across on foot.

    I really think so too. In keeping with my previous comments about Asheron's Call -- the world was retarded huge ( NSF56k http://ac.warcry.com/media/images/maps/derethmap_2006_08_06.png). I think it was estimated to take like 3 days or so to run from the north to southern coast, let alone from east to west. I mean I played it for two years and I still hadn't been everywhere. It just added this incredible sense of adventure and exploration to it all. Especially when combined with the fact that huffing it on foot was primary transportation along with strategically placed portal routes. You would load up on supplies with your friends, and just take off down the road and it could be an hour before you hit the next town. Dungeons, towers, forts, forests, huge waterfalls, abandoned towns, enemy outposts... you could come across any number of cool things and you could potentially be the first to see them. And when you were hunting and leveling in an area, bound to that areas lifestone, you were really living there for a while, because traveling -- especially to more lucrative areas -- wasn't a trivial task. You'd get to know the local people, the area's local guilds, and the politics and terroritorial claims that went along with them, and you'd often get swept up into the wars that they were involved in. There were dungeons, quests, and play areas still being discovered way after release.

    Ant000 on
  • Options
    delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    mrflippy wrote: »
    DevilGuy wrote: »
    4. I still don't like the idea of losing anything just because someone else managed to kill me.
    A: They fucking killed you! what else do you want? do they need to come to your house and hack your machine before you acknowledge that maybe they outsmarted you and maybe you need to get a little wiser to hold on to your shit? Its not like any smart player would be left assetless by getting killed.
    I think that the disconnect here is that some people really don't like others being able to kill them and take their stuff or cause them to lose something. It's not that they didn't realize that they got outsmarted or that they just suddenly realized, "Oh, man, maybe I should be more careful!" No, they just don't want it to happen in the first place.

    Which is fair enough, they can play something else. For better or for worse (better imo) EvE's gameplay virtually revolves around the fragility of property.

    And EvE can devolve into one of the lower subscriber base MMO's on the market. EvE gameplay is a niche market and will always be a niche market. It is nowhere close to being indicative of what MMO's of the future will be like.

    MMO's are and will always be a time sink, therefore a "risk vs. reward" model will always fail compared to an "investment = reward" model. So I think a better retort would be: you can just keep playing EvE, and the rest of us will play the next-gen MMO's.

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • Options
    GarthorGarthor Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    delroland wrote: »
    mrflippy wrote: »
    DevilGuy wrote: »
    4. I still don't like the idea of losing anything just because someone else managed to kill me.
    A: They fucking killed you! what else do you want? do they need to come to your house and hack your machine before you acknowledge that maybe they outsmarted you and maybe you need to get a little wiser to hold on to your shit? Its not like any smart player would be left assetless by getting killed.
    I think that the disconnect here is that some people really don't like others being able to kill them and take their stuff or cause them to lose something. It's not that they didn't realize that they got outsmarted or that they just suddenly realized, "Oh, man, maybe I should be more careful!" No, they just don't want it to happen in the first place.

    Which is fair enough, they can play something else. For better or for worse (better imo) EvE's gameplay virtually revolves around the fragility of property.

    And EvE can devolve into one of the lower subscriber base MMO's on the market. EvE gameplay is a niche market and will always be a niche market. It is nowhere close to being indicative of what MMO's of the future will be like.

    MMO's are and will always be a time sink, therefore a "risk vs. reward" model will always fail compared to an "investment = reward" model. So I think a better retort would be: you can just keep playing EvE, and the rest of us will play the next-gen MMO's.

    They'll also piss and moan that we're horrible people for playing such a terrible game and that we're pussies.

    You forgot about that.

    Garthor on
  • Options
    delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Garthor wrote: »
    delroland wrote: »
    mrflippy wrote: »
    DevilGuy wrote: »
    4. I still don't like the idea of losing anything just because someone else managed to kill me.
    A: They fucking killed you! what else do you want? do they need to come to your house and hack your machine before you acknowledge that maybe they outsmarted you and maybe you need to get a little wiser to hold on to your shit? Its not like any smart player would be left assetless by getting killed.
    I think that the disconnect here is that some people really don't like others being able to kill them and take their stuff or cause them to lose something. It's not that they didn't realize that they got outsmarted or that they just suddenly realized, "Oh, man, maybe I should be more careful!" No, they just don't want it to happen in the first place.

    Which is fair enough, they can play something else. For better or for worse (better imo) EvE's gameplay virtually revolves around the fragility of property.

    And EvE can devolve into one of the lower subscriber base MMO's on the market. EvE gameplay is a niche market and will always be a niche market. It is nowhere close to being indicative of what MMO's of the future will be like.

    MMO's are and will always be a time sink, therefore a "risk vs. reward" model will always fail compared to an "investment = reward" model. So I think a better retort would be: you can just keep playing EvE, and the rest of us will play the next-gen MMO's.

    [EvE players will] also piss and moan that we're horrible people for playing such a terrible game and that we're pussies.

    You forgot about that.

    Nope, totally didn't forget that.

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    delroland wrote: »
    MMO's are and will always be a time sink, therefore a "risk vs. reward" model will always fail compared to an "investment = reward" model. So I think a better retort would be: you can just keep playing EvE, and the rest of us will play the exact same MMO's that we always have, while complaining that there's no innovation.

    Fix'd that for ya.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    GarthorGarthor Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Aaaaaaaaaand there you have it.

    Garthor on
  • Options
    GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I'm pretty sure most of the complaints come from people who don't play those game. Or, at least, the loud ones. That tend to also include PVP. And harsh death penalties. And UO-tinted glasses.

    Glal on
  • Options
    ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    It's completely and utterly true. Playing it safe isn't going to be innovative anytime soon, and since MMOGs are such a big financial risk I'm sure it's hard to invest in an idea that might not pay off. It's the harsh reality of creating something so ambitious, as well as something in its infancy.

    Zombiemambo on
    JKKaAGp.png
  • Options
    electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Oh of course, hence why "the next big thing" is still just going to be WoW with better graphics. I'm skeptical that there will be very much innovation in the genre. SWG backed off from it's potentially innovative approach to be more standard (and fucked up because they did bow to the pressure to make it more of a conventional MMO).

    electricitylikesme on
  • Options
    SzechuanosaurusSzechuanosaurus Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited December 2007
    delroland wrote: »
    mrflippy wrote: »
    DevilGuy wrote: »
    4. I still don't like the idea of losing anything just because someone else managed to kill me.
    A: They fucking killed you! what else do you want? do they need to come to your house and hack your machine before you acknowledge that maybe they outsmarted you and maybe you need to get a little wiser to hold on to your shit? Its not like any smart player would be left assetless by getting killed.
    I think that the disconnect here is that some people really don't like others being able to kill them and take their stuff or cause them to lose something. It's not that they didn't realize that they got outsmarted or that they just suddenly realized, "Oh, man, maybe I should be more careful!" No, they just don't want it to happen in the first place.

    Which is fair enough, they can play something else. For better or for worse (better imo) EvE's gameplay virtually revolves around the fragility of property.

    And EvE can devolve into one of the lower subscriber base MMO's on the market. EvE gameplay is a niche market and will always be a niche market. It is nowhere close to being indicative of what MMO's of the future will be like.

    MMO's are and will always be a time sink, therefore a "risk vs. reward" model will always fail compared to an "investment = reward" model. So I think a better retort would be: you can just keep playing EvE, and the rest of us will play the next-gen MMO's.

    Yeah, that's probably true. I wasn't trying to be arrogant and elitist. EvE just isn't for some (most) people. On reflection, I think your half right about it not being the future of MMOs as well. I think it's unlikely that MMOs will all evolve into one generic concept. Much more likely is that they will evolve into several niches that all survive off certain subsets of the gaming community. Some people will want harsh PvP oriented games like EvE, some people will want large-scale FPS warfare like BF2/Planetside, some people will want PvE oriented trad-fantasy RPGs, some people will want persistent world MMO football management sims, some people will want graphical social interation simulators (ie MSN/VoIP sims). While the most popular genre will take the lead, it's rare that other genres fade out completely.

    Hell, a lot of people will want choice and variety. I currently play EvE and Tabula Rasa. I love EvE for it's slow, harsh, political gameplay and I'm becoming more and more enamored with Tabula Rasa for it's instant action, low risk gameplay.

    Szechuanosaurus on
  • Options
    HallowedFaithHallowedFaith Call me Cloud. Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    What the hell? You can pay for game-time with in-game money? Bad ass.

    HallowedFaith on
    I'm making video games. DesignBy.Cloud
  • Options
    Ant000Ant000 Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    What the hell? You can pay for game-time with in-game money? Bad ass.

    Yeah that is really cool actually; I never heard about that. I guess it goes a long way to combating the inflationary tendencies of MMO economies. Without it's economy EVE isn't much.


    There's always a very vocal group of people who are very adamant that PVP-oriented political MMO's will be the minority, but I'm really not so sure. One has really yet to be done right, in the post UO MMO world. If anyone was around for the run up to Shadowbane, the anticipation for that game and it's concepts was incredibly high. It was only after people got into the beta, and word of mouth etc spread that it was a buggy piece of crap, that the hype dropped off. It still managed to sell a ton of copies though, at around 200,000 copies in it's first two months or so if I recall. For the time it was released, that is a serious achievement. EQ was ruling the roost at the time at about 500,000 after having been out for four years or so.

    Ant000 on
  • Options
    SzechuanosaurusSzechuanosaurus Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited December 2007
    What the hell? You can pay for game-time with in-game money? Bad ass.

    If you're talking about EvE, yeah. It's not as straight forward as paying CCP (the developers) with ISK though (the in-game currency). What you do is someone buys a time code and then instead of using it themselves, they can sell it to you in exchange for in-game currency. There is an interface on the website to facilitate this process where CCP acts as escrow so you can't get scammed doing it - they hold the time code and the money then swap them over the accounts once both parties approve the transaction. So CCP are still making money off the process, because someone, somewhere is still buying the time off them. It makes sense to facilitate this process in a safe environment because of this.

    As for the costs - 30 day time cards cost around 180 million ISK at current market value. They cost $15 (USD) to buy. 180 million isk is well outside the monthly profit of a new character, but a moderately skilled character can probably make that in about a weeks worth of solid play. So if you have a job, you're probably better of just buying the time with real money, because it equates to 1 hours worth of wages a month, where as buying it with ISK probably equates to around 15 hours worth of gaming a month. But some people can make vast amounts of money very quickly (generally, those who already have a lot of money, so can make millions from flipping products on the market or have their own private mining network or whatever) so it becomes a very viable option for them. Conversely, for those of us who make a decent wage but don't have a huge amount of time to spend grinding isk in-game, it's an easy way to pad our virtual wallets (from buying a time card and then selling it to a spacerich player).

    It also doesn't really damage the in-game economy, because you aren't dumping loads of money out of the system or artificially seeding huge amounts of cash into the system - the in-game money just passes from one owner to the other.

    Szechuanosaurus on
  • Options
    DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    MMORPGs will evolve at about the same rate as mainstream real time "strategy" games, that is to say, not at all.

    DisruptorX2 on
    1208768734831.jpg
  • Options
    PierceNeckPierceNeck Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I look forward to the day where I can plug my brain into my computer and be IN the mmorpg.

    No more keyboard turning, mouse clicking, button mashing for me!

    PierceNeck on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    reVersereVerse Attack and Dethrone God Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    PierceNeck wrote: »
    I look forward to the day where I can plug my brain into my computer and be IN the mmorpg.

    No more keyboard turning, mouse clicking, button mashing for me!

    It's gonna suck if you get hacked, though.

    reVerse on
  • Options
    PierceNeckPierceNeck Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I'll wear a helmet.

    That's kinda like a firewall, right?

    PierceNeck on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    mrflippymrflippy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Ant000 wrote: »
    There's always a very vocal group of people who are very adamant that PVP-oriented political MMO's will be the minority, but I'm really not so sure. One has really yet to be done right, in the post UO MMO world. If anyone was around for the run up to Shadowbane, the anticipation for that game and it's concepts was incredibly high. It was only after people got into the beta, and word of mouth etc spread that it was a buggy piece of crap, that the hype dropped off. It still managed to sell a ton of copies though, at around 200,000 copies in it's first two months or so if I recall. For the time it was released, that is a serious achievement. EQ was ruling the roost at the time at about 500,000 after having been out for four years or so.
    I'm not really sure where I stand on this. My first reaction is that there's no way a PVP-oriented game is going to be in the majority. Popular and successful, sure, but a huge portion of the MMO market? That seems unlikely. I think PVP runs counter to many things that people want to do in games. You can't always relax and have fun if you're looking over your shoulder all of the time, you can't just go off on your own, etc.

    Plus, who defines what "done right" means? I know for a fact that my definition is different than other people's.

    I don't mean to keep harping on PVP stuff, but I can't help from thinking that there's this idea that if only someone would create a good game, if only someone would get it right, then a people would "come around" and finally realize that PVP is the way to go. Maybe I'm off base here, I don't know. That's just an impression that I get sometimes.

    mrflippy on
  • Options
    PoketpixiePoketpixie Siege Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    There's a lot of stuff in both PvP and PvE that developers have yet to "get it right". Basically what it comes down to is the most MMO worlds are too static with too few options. What they need is to add more options, interactivity, and unpredictability. They need to make the games more dynamic. They need to get away from all these repetitive treadmills and make games that are accessible and fun right off the bat. I don't know what kind of mechanics they'd need to make that happen but that's what developers need to work towards. Of course, in the absence of a level/gear treadmill they would have to, in fact, come up with an actual game to play.

    Poketpixie on
  • Options
    Ant000Ant000 Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Poketpixie wrote: »
    There's a lot of stuff in both PvP and PvE that developers have yet to "get it right". Basically what it comes down to is the most MMO worlds are too static with too few options. What they need is to add more options, interactivity, and unpredictability. They need to make the games more dynamic. They need to get away from all these repetitive treadmills and make games that are accessible and fun right off the bat. I don't know what kind of mechanics they'd need to make that happen but that's what developers need to work towards. Of course, in the absence of a level/gear treadmill they would have to, in fact, come up with an actual game to play.


    That's one of the huge things open-ended worlds and the PVP inherent in them have going for them, in my eyes. The dynamic and unpredictable human element, and all the human generated game play and content that comes along with it. Design the game as a base around which people can engage themselves in the specific gameplay experiences they're interested in. Do it by creating robust combat, skill, organizational, political, crafting, construction, economic, game world, and lore elements, to name a few. The experiences found in a game like that I feel would be infinitely more satisfying than the stuck to the rails theme park, assembly line content production and consumption that WoW offers.

    I think a lot of people's hangups about PVP are also rooted in their experiences with games like WoW and EQ. Where if you were to suggest the possibility of item loss on death, they would balk at the idea that their legendary axe could be taken by a toothless ganker at 3am; but who says items have to command such a huge role in the outcome of a battle? If they mention that they'd just be targets for roving gank squads, who says that combat in MMOs has to be strickly a numbers game? That applies to both numbers in the statistical sense and in the actual number of bodies. Challenge your assumptions!!! :).
    mrflippy wrote: »

    Plus, who defines what "done right" means? I know for a fact that my definition is different than other people's.

    I don't mean to keep harping on PVP stuff, but I can't help from thinking that there's this idea that if only someone would create a good game, if only someone would get it right, then a people would "come around" and finally realize that PVP is the way to go. Maybe I'm off base here, I don't know. That's just an impression that I get sometimes.



    I think that idea exists too, but are you saying that idea is false or a negative? I see that idea existing because people have had positive tastes of PVP gameplay and the experience it entails, but the experiences are usually smack dab in the middle of games that are either unforgivably rough around the edges and under-developed, oppressively intimidating, or were created without said gameplay being a central theme in the design process and so it suffers as the game goes on. That being said then, most people don't get those brief tastes, so it's sort of a hope that someone will create the polished and properly supported experience for those people who never got to properly experience it, so that we can truly see just what the majority wants.

    Ant000 on
  • Options
    GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    PVE is cooperative/solo-viable. PVP is competitive. Just because some MMOs have both these elements doesn't mean that they will both appeal to all their players, if they only did it right.

    Glal on
  • Options
    ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    PvE pretty much sucks in every MMOG I can think of. It's too predictable.

    Zombiemambo on
    JKKaAGp.png
  • Options
    mrflippymrflippy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Ant000 wrote: »
    mrflippy wrote: »

    Plus, who defines what "done right" means? I know for a fact that my definition is different than other people's.

    I don't mean to keep harping on PVP stuff, but I can't help from thinking that there's this idea that if only someone would create a good game, if only someone would get it right, then a people would "come around" and finally realize that PVP is the way to go. Maybe I'm off base here, I don't know. That's just an impression that I get sometimes.



    I think that idea exists too, but are you saying that idea is false or a negative? I see that idea existing because people have had positive tastes of PVP gameplay and the experience it entails, but the experiences are usually smack dab in the middle of games that are either unforgivably rough around the edges and under-developed, oppressively intimidating, or were created without said gameplay being a central theme in the design process and so it suffers as the game goes on. That being said then, most people don't get those brief tastes, so it's sort of a hope that someone will create the polished and properly supported experience for those people who never got to properly experience it, so that we can truly see just what the majority wants.

    Perhaps I'm being pedantic here, but I'm really referring to the idea the the majority of people will come around. To really do that, you're going to need an incredible turn-around. That means either an absolutely phenomenal game (read: WoW-killer that really is everything to everybody) or a slow, gradual process across many games.

    Of course that assumes that the different play styles can be catered to at the same time. How do you reconcile the people that have fun by killing other players and the players that don't have fun when they're being killed by other players? What do you do when you have a 30 year old mom who really only wants cooperative PVE content and the 14 year old kid who really only wants to pwn n00bs? I really think that some of this is irreconcilable.

    (This makes me want to go do research on game theory and psychology and stuff now)

    mrflippy on
  • Options
    GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    PvE pretty much sucks in every MMOG I can think of. It's too predictable.
    What do you think about Diablo? (not implying it's an MMO)

    Glal on
  • Options
    ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Glal wrote: »
    PvE pretty much sucks in every MMOG I can think of. It's too predictable.
    What do you think about Diablo? (not implying it's an MMO)

    Well, considering items are completely random, and dungeon designs are random, and you can fight unique enemies that are random, I'd say it's not exactly predictable.

    Zombiemambo on
    JKKaAGp.png
  • Options
    ForarForar #432 Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Glal wrote: »
    PvE pretty much sucks in every MMOG I can think of. It's too predictable.
    What do you think about Diablo? (not implying it's an MMO)

    Well, considering items are completely random, and dungeon designs are random, and you can fight unique enemies that are random, I'd say it's not exactly predictable.

    I hope this hasn't been addressed earlier in the thread, However;

    A measure of predictability is required if you're going to have diverse classes (tanks/healers/dps, or whatever it is. Support with varying degrees of sustainability and dps with varying degrees of survivability/aoe or single target focus/longevity) and encounters that require or heavily benefit the use of certain classes or skills.

    Imagine the shenanigans involved in trying to get 20-40 people into an encounter when the number of tanks you need is random, the number of healers/buffers/debuffers you need is random, and one day the instance/encounter greatly benefits you for having massive aoe dps, and the next day penalizes you harshly just for bringing _____'s into the battle.

    While the WoW model is almost scary in the amount of precision high end guilds will focus on following strats to the letter, there is a measure of room for imbalance of classes/specs/gear and approach to said encounter found in familiarity with it. While many might find this as exciting as tackling an excell spreadsheet, some obviously do enjoy doing things differently (no rogues online? Guess the mages, shaman and warriors will have to be fast on those interrupts!) or merely faster, more efficiently, and getting people free to do as they wish again in short order.

    Unless you take the Hellgate London approach and make every class self sufficient, or the CoH approach where enough debuffing can allmost replace tanking for many levels/challenges in the game, some level of predictability is, in my opinion, a good thing.

    Forar on
    First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
  • Options
    GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Glal wrote: »
    PvE pretty much sucks in every MMOG I can think of. It's too predictable.
    What do you think about Diablo? (not implying it's an MMO)
    Well, considering items are completely random, and dungeon designs are random, and you can fight unique enemies that are random, I'd say it's not exactly predictable.
    Interesting. For myself, that level of randomness was so insignificant it didn't actually bring anything to the table.

    Glal on
  • Options
    mrflippymrflippy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Glal wrote: »
    PvE pretty much sucks in every MMOG I can think of. It's too predictable.
    What do you think about Diablo? (not implying it's an MMO)

    Well, considering items are completely random, and dungeon designs are random, and you can fight unique enemies that are random, I'd say it's not exactly predictable.

    So when you say predictable, you are really referring to the monster placement and movement? What about things like combat systems and monster AI?

    mrflippy on
  • Options
    mrflippymrflippy Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Forar wrote: »
    Glal wrote: »
    PvE pretty much sucks in every MMOG I can think of. It's too predictable.
    What do you think about Diablo? (not implying it's an MMO)

    Well, considering items are completely random, and dungeon designs are random, and you can fight unique enemies that are random, I'd say it's not exactly predictable.

    I hope this hasn't been addressed earlier in the thread, However;

    A measure of predictability is required if you're going to have diverse classes (tanks/healers/dps, or whatever it is. Support with varying degrees of sustainability and dps with varying degrees of survivability/aoe or single target focus/longevity) and encounters that require or heavily benefit the use of certain classes or skills.
    Imagine the shenanigans involved in trying to get 20-40 people into an encounter when the number of tanks you need is random, the number of healers/buffers/debuffers you need is random, and one day the instance/encounter greatly benefits you for having massive aoe dps, and the next day penalizes you harshly just for bringing _____'s into the battle.

    While the WoW model is almost scary in the amount of precision high end guilds will focus on following strats to the letter, there is a measure of room for imbalance of classes/specs/gear and approach to said encounter found in familiarity with it. While many might find this as exciting as tackling an excell spreadsheet, some obviously do enjoy doing things differently (no rogues online? Guess the mages, shaman and warriors will have to be fast on those interrupts!) or merely faster, more efficiently, and getting people free to do as they wish again in short order.

    Unless you take the Hellgate London approach and make every class self sufficient, or the CoH approach where enough debuffing can allmost replace tanking for many levels/challenges in the game, some level of predictability is, in my opinion, a good thing.

    I see where you're coming from. I think if you're going into a huge raid-type encounter, then some level of predictability is good. However, I think there is room to work with smaller groups (<= 6 seems to be a pretty good number) in a more dynamic environment. Imagine if each dungeon had random elements and surprises, instead of someone just knowing to stop here at this point because there's a patrol coming up behind soon. Instead of specializing for a certain encounter, the group would need to be able to handle more types of things. Perhaps they would be less efficient, but they would also be more resilient.

    mrflippy on
  • Options
    PoketpixiePoketpixie Siege Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    With regards to predictability and dynamic content....think about WoW's "invasion" events. The basic concept is there....it's something different but Blizz didn't follow through with it. The mobs simply spawned...and sat. They did *nothing*. Just like every other mob in the game. They might as well all be different colored sheep waiting to be led to the slaughter.

    But what if you add the ability for the mobs to build defenses, reinforce their position, to seek out resources to claim, and by virtue of their activity they become more powerful. What happens if they're left alone too long? They start to build more than a village...they start building towers, cities, fortresses....an empire. Give them the ability to overrun a player city completely or even raze it to the ground(until players can retake the area and rebuild). Allow players in turn to bolster the defenses.....building their own towers and guard points, reinforcing city defenses with structural improvements, stronger npc troops, better equipped troops, etc. You could even let players pick sides and go at it if it's a pvp oriented game.

    The point being, the landscape changes. Mob position and strength fluctuates. Players are able to affect change to the gameworld. The gameworld itself changes based on player action or inaction.

    How long has Van Cleef been building that ship of his? What if he managed to finish it and launch it? How long have the Scourge been sitting content within the plaguelands? How many times are the Burning Legion going to assault the Dark Portal before they finally break through for once? Or get crushed and pushed out of the area.

    In this kind of world boss mobs would not be static per se. You'd kill one...eventually another will rise to take his place but the one you killed stays dead. Someone else moves into that dungeon and sets up shop....so the mobs and the encounters in the dungeon change on a semi-regular basis for some areas. Others might be more or less permanent simply because the enemy is too strong to be overcome. The challenge is then to see how far into the dungeon you can progress before being pushed back and forced to retreat.

    It would be a very different kind of game from what people are used to that's for sure.

    Poketpixie on
  • Options
    ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    mrflippy wrote: »
    Glal wrote: »
    PvE pretty much sucks in every MMOG I can think of. It's too predictable.
    What do you think about Diablo? (not implying it's an MMO)

    Well, considering items are completely random, and dungeon designs are random, and you can fight unique enemies that are random, I'd say it's not exactly predictable.

    So when you say predictable, you are really referring to the monster placement and movement? What about things like combat systems and monster AI?

    That's what I meant by predictability. Go into a select instance in WoW, run it, say...10 times. I guarantee that, if you have a certain strategy, each run is going to be almost identical.

    Zombiemambo on
    JKKaAGp.png
  • Options
    GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    It's a good thing instances are entirely optional and only a small part of WoW's PVE then.

    Glal on
  • Options
    ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Yeah, but killing random mobs isn't exactly on-the-edge-of-my-seat exciting,

    Zombiemambo on
    JKKaAGp.png
  • Options
    GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Neither is killing the 10 000th Fetish, but hey. ;-)

    Glal on
  • Options
    PierceNeckPierceNeck Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Bone fetish's were cause for concern though.

    PierceNeck on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    So were random elites. It's almost as if both games were made by the same people.
    :D

    Glal on
  • Options
    PierceNeckPierceNeck Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Madness!

    PierceNeck on
    steam_sig.png
Sign In or Register to comment.