Here is the problem though Raidan, If you leash before the zone line, you remove the need to know where the zone line is. So, all you need to know then is that if you run long enough, the leash breaks and you are safe. I think realism is nice when it does not conflict with game play, but if realism only ends up giving people a freebie, reducing risk and removing the point of the danger in the game play, well... game play should then win out over realism.
I don't disagree, and 100% support unleashed mobs for the same reasons you do, I agree it is an exchange of realism for reduced gameplay.
However, if all mobs were coded different (basically a random agro range); and it wasn't run 10 paces and hide behind a tree for all mobs, I don't think players would be able to easily learn 1500+ agro patterns (or however many mobs there may be). Some might break off (like certain humans mobs as I suggested), some might be able to be hidden from, some might have see invis, and others would follow continuously. Obviously that amount of coding would just create an extreme headache for the developers, which is why I think /train to zone is the much easier and better overall option anyhow. I only suggested the above if a compromise had to be made.
Here is the problem though Raidan, If you leash before the zone line, you remove the need to know where the zone line is. So, all you need to know then is that if you run long enough, the leash breaks and you are safe. I think realism is nice when it does not conflict with game play, but if realism only ends up giving people a freebie, reducing risk and removing the point of the danger in the game play, well... game play should then win out over realism.
I don't disagree, and 100% support unleashed mobs for the same reasons you do, I agree it is an exchange of realism for reduced gameplay.
However, if all mobs were coded different (basically a random agro range); and it wasn't run 10 paces and hide behind a tree for all mobs, I don't think players would be able to easily learn 1500+ agro patterns (or however many mobs there may be). Some might break off (like certain humans mobs as I suggested), some might be able to be hidden from, some might have see invis, and others would follow continuously. Obviously that amount of coding would just create an extreme headache for the developers, which is why I think /train to zone is the much easier and better overall option anyhow. I only suggested the above if a compromise had to be made.
I think random aggro ranges would be cool in theory. I'm sure people could find way to exploit such things in one way or another but the idea of having something other than the same aggro range for every damn mob in the game is a good place to start.
My biggest gripe has always been with how mobs just aren't "powerful and scary" like they used to be back in the days of EQ. All these new games you play, you can run through hordes of mobs and it's almost impossible to actually die unless you just stop and stand there. EQ had you shitting your pants if you overpulled 1 mob, or hell just aggroed 1 red mob who could outrun you. PS - in addition to messing with aggro range I would like to see mobs of certain types have adjusted run speeds. IE if you pick a fight with a four legged creature expect it to run you down much easier than some big fat ogre.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Leashing and having to run to the zone are the same basic mechanic. At some point, the mob decides you have "gotten away," and won't chase you anymore.
The "problem" is not that newer MMOs have leashing. Seamless MMOs effectively require leashing in order to provide a similar zoning-to-safety experience for getting away.
The "problem" is the length of the leash. By using larger leashes, you get a similar experience. You can still have trains if you design the zone with a few bottlenecks.
I am fine with either. Leashing can be coded to be a more robust, flexible, and better system, but I suspect running to zone will be so much easier to code and not get wrong.
Why should the leash be shorter than the zone line?
Why should a zone line determine the length of the leash? I think that's far more bizarre than the leash is
"Here is the problem though Raidan, If you leash before the zone line, you remove the need to know where the zone line is."
Between these two posts, it seems that there are certain odd conventions of bad design you're not too willing to let go of.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
It causes too many problems and isn't worth the harassment. You want danger go play pvp server.
No it doesn't. EQ had it for years. You want a mainstream game, go play one.
EQ had it for years... until they figured out how stupid is was for both game design and realism at the same time.
Realism, lol... yes because a rubber banding mob is "realism". /facepalm
No, it's not realism. I'm thinking, based on reading this thread that there are some comprehension issues happening. I'll make it clear.
When I say it was bad for both game design and realism, that doesn't mean I think that rubber-banding mobs is good for realism.
So what is your solution? If non-leashed mobs is not a solution and leashed mobs is not a solution, what is your point? You do realize if you do not have a practical solution for the game to support your point, then your position is meaningless?
Games are often a balance between realism and game play. Sometimes, suspension of disbelief is given because a given mechanic provides a nice game play feature that works well for the game. In some cases, the realism is better fit depending on the focus of the game and how that realism aids game play. So if you don't have a practical and reasonable solution, then your point is wasted.
As for leashed vs non-leashed, the arguments have been made. As I said, leashed mobs create many abuses to game play, removing risk, removing consequence, and removing the many elements of feel of danger that existed in games like EQ.
Today we have tons of games with leashed mobs, there is no fear as people run through the mobs, there is no care in travel, no real game play, just bored people smashing buttons trying to get to the next place as fast as possible so they can smash more buttons. There is no world, no feeling in the play.
So, if leashed is bad, if non-leashed is bad, then what? Or are you just hear to grace us with your disagreement, but provide nothing useful further?
Comments
I know a guy who has a woody for breakage, too.
He's more mad l33t than you, which he'll be happy to explain in great detail at any time.
However, if all mobs were coded different (basically a random agro range); and it wasn't run 10 paces and hide behind a tree for all mobs, I don't think players would be able to easily learn 1500+ agro patterns (or however many mobs there may be). Some might break off (like certain humans mobs as I suggested), some might be able to be hidden from, some might have see invis, and others would follow continuously. Obviously that amount of coding would just create an extreme headache for the developers, which is why I think /train to zone is the much easier and better overall option anyhow. I only suggested the above if a compromise had to be made.
My biggest gripe has always been with how mobs just aren't "powerful and scary" like they used to be back in the days of EQ. All these new games you play, you can run through hordes of mobs and it's almost impossible to actually die unless you just stop and stand there. EQ had you shitting your pants if you overpulled 1 mob, or hell just aggroed 1 red mob who could outrun you. PS - in addition to messing with aggro range I would like to see mobs of certain types have adjusted run speeds. IE if you pick a fight with a four legged creature expect it to run you down much easier than some big fat ogre.
better than standing in line at the EZMode cash shop. j/k
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
"Here is the problem though Raidan, If you leash before the zone line, you remove the need to know where the zone line is."
Between these two posts, it seems that there are certain odd conventions of bad design you're not too willing to let go of.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Mainstream design
*player runs through a bunch mobs and they give chase*
*player runs until the tether breaks and stands like an idiot laughing as the mob turns around and runs back to its home*
Dats Wealism! /derp /derp
When I say it was bad for both game design and realism, that doesn't mean I think that rubber-banding mobs is good for realism.
Games are often a balance between realism and game play. Sometimes, suspension of disbelief is given because a given mechanic provides a nice game play feature that works well for the game. In some cases, the realism is better fit depending on the focus of the game and how that realism aids game play. So if you don't have a practical and reasonable solution, then your point is wasted.
As for leashed vs non-leashed, the arguments have been made. As I said, leashed mobs create many abuses to game play, removing risk, removing consequence, and removing the many elements of feel of danger that existed in games like EQ.
Today we have tons of games with leashed mobs, there is no fear as people run through the mobs, there is no care in travel, no real game play, just bored people smashing buttons trying to get to the next place as fast as possible so they can smash more buttons. There is no world, no feeling in the play.
So, if leashed is bad, if non-leashed is bad, then what? Or are you just hear to grace us with your disagreement, but provide nothing useful further?