Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Unfair games - is it possible?
Madatan
Member UncommonPosts: 182
I'm an old fox when it comes to MMOs, been playing everything with a sub since UO and tons of muds. And the beginning of MMOs was magically just because it was new, cool and awesome. But lately I've been starting to find it bland and boring. No innovation, same tracks from game to game. I've been trying to understand what it is that I don't like about the current themepark or the occasional half decent sandbox and I think I got it. I don't want games to be fair.
I hate it that a powerful sorcerer should be beaten by a warrior, I don't like that an Giant assassin should be as good as a Gnome assassin or that a Human archer should be as sharp eyed as a Wood Elf.
I want it to be unfair. I would like to see a powerful mage just woop the asses of two warriors running against him. It would create immersion on a whole new level. Other things would of course have to change too, it can't be as easy becoming a powerful mage, maybe you have to find a book of spells thats extremly hard to find, maybe it's even the only one of its kind. Maybe you will become hunted by a large group of other players who also want that book.
I want it possible for a ranger to find a magical bow that could pierce any protective spell, a paladin who could call upon his gods in one death defying moment, an assassin who could sneak past anyone with her very rare cloak of invisibility.
But I realise that this is a dream, an almost impossible dream. What do you think, could this ever become a reality? Where the lines between a good fantasy book and a fantasy MMO starts to fade, and you start to feel that feeling you had when you first logged in to DAoC. That feeling of awe.
Comments
Instanced arena set ups mean the whiners ensure that all classes are the same.Of course you can make an unfair game, as long as you balance it in some way or another.
You can make it unfair depending on the situation. For an instance can a fire mage get a bad debuff as long as it rains, he could beslightly more powerful than other classes when it not rains then to even it out.
A vampire could be more powerful than other races at night but less powerful at day.
The thing is that balance is something overall. A ranger can be very dangerous at long range but easy to beat in melee. A mage can have a single powerful spell with long cooldown whilehis rests spells do slightly less damage.
A small character can be harder to hit (in mechanics based on collision detection instead of tab targetting) but also will have some less hitpoints.
You can make a game very unfair and still balanced, it is just a lot harder than having a few evenly balanced classes where all attacks themselves are balanced as well.
Gunpowder weapons could be used like this more realistically. A wheelock pistol will pierce almost any armor like cheese but it also take a long time to reload it.
Having a single class that always are more powerful than the others on the other hand just plain suck. Every class should have their moment in the sun. You don't need rock - scissor - paper mechanics but can instead have factors based on the enviroment and the situation.
It's been done already in EQ1. I loathed going indoors with my druid.
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
I don't consider that as unfair, as you say it balances itself out depending on the situation. I am talking about a game where Magic is actual as powerful as it is meant to be. That includes having the advantage in most situations, assuming you have skill and versatility.
But maybe I look at it from the wrong way, what I really am looking for is a game that rewards your efforts, and not just in having the most kills and experience but rather because you took the effort of climbing a huge mountain, slaying a dragon, using your brain and acquire the Book of Spells. A unique item, something that gives you the edge if used right. Of course it could be lost if a group of adventureres band together and use their talents to take you down.
Thats the sort of unfair gameplay I'm talking about. And I realise it's close to impossible.
Unfairness has zero play- or re-play value. What's the point in unfairness in games? People want to have challenging and unforgetable experiences in games, not want to be reminded of our (mostly) ruined Real-life in terms of non-existing social-behaviour.
Sort of my point, how could it not be a challenge and unforgettable if a group of players finally succeed in taking down a mage who succeeded in his turn to get a very powerful spellbook.
If it wasn't about endgame, and more about just progressing forever then you wouldn't have to worry about all this nonsense. You sound like the type of player that should be playing progression style MMORPGs on release date, but once they show age jump off the coaster as it heads into the station before it loops back around again.
I had (perhaps?) similar ideas about the future of MMORPGs a few years ago but the industry went into the opposite direction. Now it's "everything for everybody" and the brandnew level 1 character is heralded as the greatest hero of the world.
I would like that there really are unique items, i.e. an item that exists only once per server, even if it's only the "Handkerchief of the Assasin that Catched the Common Cold" with some very minor cold resistance bonus.
Let's say each server has 50 or 100 different unique items from a few very mundane items like the above handkerchief to a few remarkable relics mentioned in the game lore. It's not even that much additional work for the developers, if they want they can get rid of all cutscenes and voice overs in return. 
Might be an item just lies somewhere in some obscure corner of the game world and whoever picks it up gets it, other items might just drop from a random mob after the server is life for three months and still others might be spawned as the result of a unique quest. And no BoE or BoP nonsense, please. Item decay gladly appreciated though, thus if an item is destroyed it's gone for good.
Yes, I would like that there are quests, but real unique quests that can be done only once per server. Who gets to do the quests is undefined per se. Some NPC might just give a quest to the first player that speaks with the NPC (no exclamation marks please!), another might just give the quest to whoever first speaks to him as female warrior clad in a red robe (he, the NPC just likes women wearing red robes, why not?) and another quest might just spawn for a player that stands on a very small relatively seldom visited spot in the game world or has the sense to perform a /pray emote in the local graveyard.
Instead the majority of the common mundane quests in current games gets scrapped entirely and gets replaced by equally mundane tasks (from the games I played DAoC and Vanguard had something like tasks). No need to call a mundane task a quest, isn't it? But these tasks should make sense. It makes sense when the foreman of the logging camp in the forest gives out tasks and rewards to everybody promising to kill 20 wolfs in the forest repeatedly, it does not make sense when every player on a server rescues the same NPC from a bunch of skeletons, see the difference?
Even the mundane Fedex task can make sense when it's designed properly. Remember the logging camp from the last paragraph? Now, logging camps should need axes and saws, thus the blacksmith in town can repeatedly give players the task to deliver axes and saws to the logging camp, small wonder that the players have to fight through the packs of wolfes then, otherwise the blacksmith's daughter could have delivered the axes and saws to the logging camp anyway.
Would you guys play such a game where you are not a hero but just some ordinary grunt that somehow manages to handle a sword without tripping over his legs every two steps?
(BTW, the idea of the above unique items and quests need to be randomised for different servers, otherwise we just get step-by-step descriptions on a bunch of internet sites.)
I maintain this List of Sandbox MMORPGs. Please post or send PM for corrections and suggestions.
Thank you - because this is the reason you will never see one. I would like to play the game type the OP mentioned but as long as this opinion is in the majority, and it is, then you will never see an unfair game. (This is not a troll, the person who I quoted has a perfect right to his/her opinion... i am just using it as an example). My Opinion.
Currently bored with MMO's.
If you have the chance of getting this spellbook and everyone else has this chance, its not unfair. The problem is, who says, that a mage is powerful? Ok, there are tons of books, where its written this way, but there are tons of books, too, where its not written this way (and why shouldnt a warrior win against a mage, perhaps he had his magic ring, which absorbs all magic around him? :P). At the end everything has to be balanced. Means, if you have the chance, getting much more puwerfull than other plaers, it also means, that youll fell very deep, if you lose this advantage.
Normally its not implemented in games, because its very difficult to balance. If you have one spellbook and its the only one of the server, why should you fight against masses of players? Many players will keep out of every fight and only attack, if theres one single player or a small group, which cant defend against this power. And for them its not very funny.
Only way, i could imagine such a system would be: You can get a "hero", if you beat many opponents and completed difficult missions etc., means, its very hard to become a hero. But every player can get one. And every hero can become a normal player again, if he loses too many fights. Means, only if every player has the same (and what a pity, its a fair) chance to get better than others, it could be realized in an MMoRPG.
Greets Niffi
P.s: Of course my point of view.^^
When the game is "unfair" as you describe, I find people play the class that they enjoy. Granted, the few games where it was unfair, didn't have a strong pvp element. If they enjoyed hacking and slashing, thats what they played. If they enjoyed by an uber mage, they played that. The "fairness" factor comes in when you realize hacking and slashing with a giant weapon is just as effective at killing monsters then summoning a bolt of lightning from the sky with a long cast time...
Taru-Gallante-Blood elf-Elysean-Kelari-Crime Fighting-Imperial Agent
I love all of your ideas.
True of course, that a mage tend to be more powerful depends on the books
But it was more of an example than a specific requirement. And as you say regarding the magic ring, why not? I'm readin the Malazan Empire right now where there is a metal who negates most magic. Sounds like a great way to sort of balance it up. There could be great warriors able to defeat powerful mages and there could be the sneakiest rogues able to sneak up on anyone.
My point is just that why does every class(with the right equipment assuming the game is balanced) have to be equal in power? Granted that in some games it can be harder to solo a wizard than a paladin but the differences are so small it's not relevant.
Aye, there could be such evil bastards, just hunting the occasional solo player. But I think there are game mechanics that could do this much more fun. Let's say this mage has to have an Orb of Power instead, this orb must be placed in his very magical tower. Now, even if he is hiding and sneaking around that tower could be sieged, the Orb taken or destroyed and the mage getting a nasty surprise next time he tries to cast Godly Enchanted Bolt of Death
No. It won't happen because developers do not just develop for your preference. People want "fairness" because they do not want the class they like to play gimped and have no chance for a raid slot. Thus, the warrior who hack with his puny sword has to do roughly the same dps to the boss as the fireball throwing mage.
Heck, you got QQing whenever a class is behind 5% on dps.
Alternately, you have to give the classes other interesting aspects outside combat. Of course for that to be viable the game has to give equal focus to activities that are not combat or combat-oriented.
Life is unfair. I don't think games need to be.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
anyon who ever played D&D know that magic is extremely powerful but if a fighter gets too close to your wizard it is game over.
You will still have to balance it out by making the mage really squishy or it does´'t work.
Extremely powerful items is not really as far out as you think though, The highest tier raid gear in WoW is really almost that unbalanced as well. Completely unique items aren't possible though since it is too much work. You could randomize the effects on it a bit though.
Personally don't I like powerful items one bit, you need to be a great player to get one of them and if you do you becomes unbeatable. Besides, if you get that powerful the game becomes boring really fast and almost all players who got such gear would quit rather soon.
I would love to see a game where, tanks beat everything up close, assassin's destroy casters/healers, and mages destroy from ranged, a simple but kind of realistic play, no way in the old DAoC days could assassin's beat a Warrior, and no way could a warrior run through open field and kill a caster, and assassin's
my favorite, waiting for that perfect time to take out that key healer, or key dps caster, but wearing lighter armor the tanks just sneeze on them and they die, it's not unfair, its situational, you need the right class for the right situation, why should a lurikeen Nightshade Beat a huge ass Troll Hero, or Paladin in full plate armor, and his little daggers pierce through that? not happenin, i agree OP, i want an "unfair" game too, but like what someone else said earlier, instanced PvP whiners as the majority would NEVER even think about it.
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
Possible? Yes. It's never going to happen because people want fairness...
Coming off my week long ban, its time to plug TTS! I am designing a system in which not everyone can be a mage, and in which mages have a considerably larger amount of power than a general warrior. Now a single mage cannot win the game. Its a massive multiworld RTS in which crafting is about 40% of the game including base building, mage crafting, dozens of types of crafting and with thousands of item types. And sadly for some, its 100% PvE. Being a mage isn't easy. You have to work:
Explore large areas of the world to find places that weren't already looted of magic knowledge
Locate words of power for the basic kinds of magic like elemental damage and defense
Find books describing various types of magic that are specialized compared to the norm
Use books to make spell combinations with unique and awesome effects
Simply combine words in various ways to come up with special effects if you have no book shortcut
Trade magic words in a systemw here a word that is known by too many degrades
Sell grimoires that allow the use but not creation of spells to other mages and non mages
Do special mage crafting learned by accident or from books to make fabulous items
Enchant items with multiple useful magical effects
So much more
Because there is no PvP I am freed from the requirement of having all classes be perfectly equal in power. And since its a sandbox with no player caps no one is going to get shut out of a raid because of inferior specs. And in fact maximizing per second DPS is not nearly as important as crafting good items, traps, tools, utility items, and so forth. As well as good magic. And of course clever use of the environment to do crowd control and damage and not just direct spell casts. Even non mages can utilize the environment in various ways.
Also a complex and deep system of invisibility and stealth and making thief classes much more like you would hear of in a story.
There is still a use for a regular fighter though.
I don't consider that as unfair, as you say it balances itself out depending on the situation. I am talking about a game where Magic is actual as powerful as it is meant to be. That includes having the advantage in most situations, assuming you have skill and versatility.
But maybe I look at it from the wrong way, what I really am looking for is a game that rewards your efforts, and not just in having the most kills and experience but rather because you took the effort of climbing a huge mountain, slaying a dragon, using your brain and acquire the Book of Spells. A unique item, something that gives you the edge if used right. Of course it could be lost if a group of adventureres band together and use their talents to take you down.
Thats the sort of unfair gameplay I'm talking about. And I realise it's close to impossible.
You can do it for example if a Mage can kill 30 with a spell, but he needs to spend 3 minutes preparing it and then remain motionless until it is cast. This would leave him vulnerable to attacks before and after. The problem is people seem to demand 1 on 1 fairness which just means all classes are merged into 1 level at everything. Eg Mage casts fire ball warrior jumps in air and lands with " thunder strike" effect is the same.It is important to have limitations, but to be true to novels these must be able to be subsumed somehow. Nodes/ley lines, mana storage, blood magic, some mages are innately more powerful, and so forth.
It is not really about fairness, but more that everyone wants to be special. Everyone wants to be the hero. Unfortunately, if everyone is heroic, nobody really is.
That's not even what most people want though (even though it's compelling.)
The negative reaction to unfairness is that when you genuinely play skillfully the game still calls you a peasant.
In real life if the peasant skillfully lands 20 sword strikes before the King can land 3, the peasant wins.
In Darkfall I landed 20 sword strikes on another player before they landed 3, but I died in 3 while they had 90% health remaining.
Unfairness makes for terrible PVP.
Unfairness can work for PVE, but only in specific ways. If the powerful mage is a PVE boss who provides an interesting fight for 5 players, nobody cares that the fight isn't fair 1v1. They only care that the fight is fair 1v5, so that if the party plays skillfully they defeat the mage but if they screw up they lose.
Unfairness also doesn't work in PVE if it's implemented in some arbitrary "mages suck in early levels but are OP in late levels" way. Mostly because that's not a particularly interesting decision to offer in a game (excessive periods of shittiness followed by indisputed dominance.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
There is actually a way to make this balenced. you are using the class/race ideal for this. in terms of the Giant assassin vs the Gnome assassin, they should fight in different ways. the giant assassin should be burly and hard to hurt while the gnome assassin is no where to be found and then pops out of no where with a single attack killing you. Human VS Elf should be the elf seeing you at a greater distance and is able to fine tune a shot much easier. now in terms for a class vs class ideal, it should be that certian classes beat eachother under certian conditions. Sorc Vs Warrior, in a enclosed area with lots to hide behind. the warrior should be able to win just by moving. wide open field, yeah sorry warrior, your extra crispy.
Because i can.
I'm Hopeful For Every Game, Until the Fan Boys Attack My Games. Then the Knives Come Out.
Logic every gamers worst enemy.