Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

How much realism do you want in your virtual world MMORPGs?

KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,994Member Uncommon

We see a lot of threads and posts decrying the loss of "virtual worlds" and I'm certainly one of the guilty parties in this regards, but I got to thinking, just what makes a MMORPG more realistic yet at the same time remain fun?

For example, I favor mechanics such as local markets as opposed to global ones, but I don't mind having auction houses while others probably prefer players run the stores or trade themselves.

I liked it better when MMORPG's used food/drink to restore health and stamina (and somewhat influence the pacing of the gameplay), but I wouldn't want to have to eat or drink regularly to avoid starving to death as was the case in Xyson. (or Ultima VI for those who remember that one)

Travel times....mixed feelings about this.  They sort of work at a strategic level in games like EVE, where you basically have to provide a means for players to intercept each other and have them part of the strategic equation when chosing combat/logistics option. 

But that doesn't mean I didn't love Blessed Teleport Scrolls in my first MMORPG Lineage 1 where a player could set up to 30 waypoints in the game and use these scrolls to instantly teleport to them.  (You had to walk to the area the first time to expose the map however).

They weren't free, in fact, a fair share of every players game income/time was spent either farming or buying BTS's.  I got rich selling them as I farmed them with my Bugbear Mage in the ant caves.

And lets face it, I would not care for a MMORPG that made my avatar have to "relieve" himself on a regular basis, sometimes there's just such a thing as too much realism. image

So that's the question, what sorts of mechanics do you prefer that makes one MMORPG more of a virtual world than another?

 

In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
"I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

«134

Comments

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    We see a lot of threads and posts decrying the loss of "virtual worlds" and I'm certainly one of the guilty parties in this regards, but I got to thinking, just what makes a MMORPG more realistic yet at the same time remain fun?

    Unrealistic PVP (i.e. no consequence, instant respawn, dive right back in to fight some more).  Rambo-movie level of unrealistic, else video-game pvp just doesn't work.

    Pretty much required for PVP at all, isn't it?  Even the games that brag about the 'realism' of their pvp don't have posses of citizens chasing them everywhere (bounty systems at least begin to approach the problem, I guess).

    We won't even begin to catalog the thousands of ways PVE departs from "realism" in the name of fun.

     

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  • greenreengreenreen Punchoo, AKPosts: 2,101Member Uncommon
    For now I'll comment on the display. I don't want photo-realism. I'd rather have things look like a different, fantasy place. Might expand on this later, have to feed pets :D
  • OnomasOnomas Rock Hill, SCPosts: 1,128Member Uncommon

    Well considering the majority of mmorpg's today are your basic cookie-cutters, they lack the appeal most people want. Probably why most the newer games bomb after just a few months.

     

    If you play the exact same game, same classes, same combat, same options, lack of features, lacks of social interaction, lack of world all with just different skin........ you can only stomache it for so long. Quests only get you so far. You need the other stuff to keep you going.

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    We see a lot of threads and posts decrying the loss of "virtual worlds" and I'm certainly one of the guilty parties in this regards, but I got to thinking, just what makes a MMORPG more realistic yet at the same time remain fun?

    For example, I favor mechanics such as local markets as opposed to global ones, but I don't mind having auction houses while others probably prefer players run the stores or trade themselves. I prefer local markets..  If I had my way I would use the same features, EQ, WoW and SWG used.. That is if you needed or wanted certain items for crafting, it had to be gotten at specific vendors.. EQ and WoW did this with recipes and mats.. If we allow player crafting, I further push for a SWG style of selling.. instead of some global auction house..

    I liked it better when MMORPG's used food/drink to restore health and stamina (and somewhat influence the pacing of the gameplay), but I wouldn't want to have to eat or drink regularly to avoid starving to death as was the case in Xyson. (or Ultima VI for those who remember that one) For me, My favorite experience was how EQ did it.. Food and drink were very important in keeping our stamina and regen us.. From snack to large meal, determined how long the food lasted.. Then you have "stat" food too IF you had it equipt.. I am against any form of "instant" recovery food and drink like what so many modern games do..

    Travel times....mixed feelings about this.  They sort of work at a strategic level in games like EVE, where you basically have to provide a means for players to intercept each other and have them part of the strategic equation when chosing combat/logistics option.  I think travel should be mixed.. EQ did it half right, and modern day games went too far..I would be OK with allowing a limited number of global travel, but everything else has to be either a skill of traveling, or run it.. Using EQ as my example, I would be ok with a teleport in East Karana and Butcherblock.. no more..

    But that doesn't mean I didn't love Blessed Teleport Scrolls in my first MMORPG Lineage 1 where a player could set up to 30 waypoints in the game and use these scrolls to instantly teleport to them.  (You had to walk to the area the first time to expose the map however). I hated EQ's POP port books.. It made skills by Wiz and Druids meaningless..

    They weren't free, in fact, a fair share of every players game income/time was spent either farming or buying BTS's.  I got rich selling them as I farmed them with my Bugbear Mage in the ant caves.

    And lets face it, I would not care for a MMORPG that made my avatar have to "relieve" himself on a regular basis, sometimes there's just such a thing as too much realism. image

    So that's the question, what sorts of mechanics do you prefer that makes one MMORPG more of a virtual world than another?

     

    Good post there K..  I would also like to see weight allowance as EQ did..  The more you wore and carried the more it effected your ability to run and walk in the game.. AS IT SHOULD be..   Making having a buff strength meaningful..  I can also do without the super realistic graphics too.. I'm perfectly happy with the graphics in WoW and GW2 as the example..

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    On markets, I'm split. Things that are a 'one off' kind of nature and won't be sold in large stacks should be in player stalls. Things that are sold in large stacks should be sold in a stock market.

    I'm split on travel too. I think whether there is quick travel in a world or not, players should need to initially walk places to discover them. Once a player unlocks an area, then the walking just becomes a chore though. Unless the world is setup to require walking. For instance, in a game where players own land or where guilds own land, and it's possible to siege keeps and such, then walking is part of the process. If you're just out in a world questing though, then fast travel is the way to go.

    I think the food and drink mechanics are usually just a waste of time.

    Mostly what I think is that a game should make those types of decisions based on the game itself, and use a consistent logic, rather than trying to adhere to some arbitrary ideal. If eating and drinking serves some purpose other than realism, it should be in there. A simple example would be foods that have to be cooked and which buff the player somehow, or drinks in a bar making a group stronger. If the only reason to have eating and drinking in a game is to get closer to the ideal of realism, then it shouldn't be in there. The best example I can think of is eating between fights to regenerate health...players will always do it, and it will always be done as fast as possible and eventually it degenerates to the healer healing everyone and eating or drinking to regen mana.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • IlliusIllius Toronto, ONPosts: 4,148Member

    I'd like games to move closer to reallism without quite getting there.

     

    What I mean is that I'd like to have the laws of Physics be a bit more prevailant.  I'd like to climb trees, and use gravity as a means to do things...whatever they may be.  I wouldn't mind if a game came along soon t hat would slowly implement one thing at a time over the course of it's life time and build the game as I play it, provided they had a solid base for me to play with before hand.

    It's sort of like Minecraft does it.  They gave you a working game for you to play with and then slowly over time they start adding things for you to use.

    No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-

  • ReklawReklaw Am.Posts: 6,478Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    We see a lot of threads and posts decrying the loss of "virtual worlds" and I'm certainly one of the guilty parties in this regards, but I got to thinking, just what makes a MMORPG more realistic yet at the same time remain fun?

    For example, I favor mechanics such as local markets as opposed to global ones, but I don't mind having auction houses while others probably prefer players run the stores or trade themselves.

    I liked it better when MMORPG's used food/drink to restore health and stamina (and somewhat influence the pacing of the gameplay), but I wouldn't want to have to eat or drink regularly to avoid starving to death as was the case in Xyson. (or Ultima VI for those who remember that one)

    Travel times....mixed feelings about this.  They sort of work at a strategic level in games like EVE, where you basically have to provide a means for players to intercept each other and have them part of the strategic equation when chosing combat/logistics option. 

    But that doesn't mean I didn't love Blessed Teleport Scrolls in my first MMORPG Lineage 1 where a player could set up to 30 waypoints in the game and use these scrolls to instantly teleport to them.  (You had to walk to the area the first time to expose the map however).

    They weren't free, in fact, a fair share of every players game income/time was spent either farming or buying BTS's.  I got rich selling them as I farmed them with my Bugbear Mage in the ant caves.

    And lets face it, I would not care for a MMORPG that made my avatar have to "relieve" himself on a regular basis, sometimes there's just such a thing as too much realism. image

    So that's the question, what sorts of mechanics do you prefer that makes one MMORPG more of a virtual world than another?

     

    Highlighted red is what it makes it so hard. Example, loved SWG's crafting, mastered every prof. yet encountered dozens of people trying to get into crafting, yet complaining "why all the hassle, why can't I just buy item X from a cashshop or auction instead spending time make the same items over and over again which turn out useless but just give some xp." I just saw it as something logical and somewhat realistiic to have it in such a way in a more virtual world setting.

    I should only be able to go so far before I really need to take care of my wounds, like your example of Xyon I also don't want the depth of actually starving to dead when I am out of food, but I don't mind a little downtime like applying bandages or let meds do their time to work or actually needing certain professions/other players to cure you from certain disseases.

    Teleporting depends on the game but overall I don't have issue's with it. I love great wide open gameworlds, but eventuelly you have seen it all and seen it allot and there just might not be anymore reason to travel by land all over again. Though I love vehicle/creature travel allot more it has to be a meaningfull travel, if I just need to travel 15 minuted from point A to B with just barren land I'll pass and choose a teleport option, if that same 15 minutes consists of area's filled with resources, explorable dungeons, NPC enemy's, wildlife then it's 15 minutes well spend which most likely expand to allot more minutes then actually reaching point B.....atleast most of the time for me...

    Eventually the player interaction is what makes the game come alive. People these day's rely so much on game NPC's to make the world come alive as they have seen it with singleplayer games. But I don't mind NPC's react in a more realstic way, their line of sight is often awefull, you're often able to kill/shoot/blast an enemy while that another  enenmy is 2 feet next to him. In that I would say take a look at enemy behaviour in Fable, they might even warn you first when getting to close and respond to eachothers reactions.

    Why should a NPC tell you to get 10 wolfhides, instead a player can request that for use in his/her craft.Let me try to find or be that crafter that makes the best items. And while anyone can reach a master lvl in crafting, still should make every master crafter different due to different stats on resources used with crafted items.

    Overall I want the realism that fits the theme of the game but to get back at your highlighted red part, it's just hard cause fun is really subjective. If I look at what the masses enjoy in this genre is what I also enjoy but from other genre's. I just want my MMORPG experiance to go beyond that.

     

  • CuathonCuathon University City, NYPosts: 2,211Member

    Whether you can have realism or fun depends on the audience. Casual gaming is the opposite of realism because the time scales just dont work out.

    Hardcore players may or may not be amenable to realistic gameplay. It also depends on the gameplay. Farming for instance. A year long growing cycle? Never gonna fly.

    In your local market system does it take a month to move between nations? How many hours to go to and from major cities?

    So now we see it even boils down farther to what do you mean by realism?

    Another aspect of the audience is action combat vs strategy, and no, not RTS, strategy. Also warfare vs economics. Some people tolerate crafting WoW style to get the other benefits but they don't actually like it. Much less a more serious system like EvE or SWG.

    Can I make a more realistic but still fun system for an MMO? Depends on if I draw my playerbase from city builders and wargames or from action RPGs and FPSes. Yes and No respectively.

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,530Member Uncommon

    The more realism the better...

    can you imagine having you main tank die of a heart attack during a final dungeon raid boss fight?

    or hearing that your character can't raid anymore because he got Alzheimer's.

     

    epic

  • grimgryphongrimgryphon Pacific Northwest, WAPosts: 682Member
    Originally posted by Icewhite
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    We see a lot of threads and posts decrying the loss of "virtual worlds" and I'm certainly one of the guilty parties in this regards, but I got to thinking, just what makes a MMORPG more realistic yet at the same time remain fun?

    Unrealistic PVP (i.e. no consequence, instant respawn, dive right back in to fight some more).  Rambo-movie level of unrealistic, else video-game pvp just doesn't work.

    Pretty much required for PVP at all, isn't it?  Even the games that brag about the 'realism' of their pvp don't have posses of citizens chasing them everywhere (bounty systems at least begin to approach the problem, I guess).

    We won't even begin to catalog the thousands of ways PVE departs from "realism" in the name of fun.

     

    ^ This

    Do people here remember the movie Excalibur? It was lambased for having boring fight scenes. John Boorman went for the realistic route, and did his research to back it up. He showed us how a fight really would be like with 40lbs of plate armor strapped to someone's body and a claymore weighing up to 7 lbs in their hand.  Sorry, but you're just not doing backflips and multi-attack hits with that kind of gear. You're not doing those kind of moves with leather gear either. Visit any Renaissance Fair and ask one of the wandering rogues how heavy leather gear can be.

    I'll tell you what. Let's get a game designer to build us a PvP game that operates on real-world principles and physics. You swing your sword...maybe hit something...and then rest until you can gather enough strength to do it again 45 seconds later. Two or three minutes for each fight and no one wins because both parties are too damn tired to continue.

    Oh and when you're injured and can't fight any longer? You lay right where you are until someone can drag you away and tend to your wounds until you are ready to fight again. Let's say 72 hours later...or possibly days...or weeks.

    Let's not forget that when you're dead, you're dead. The end. No rez for you.

    I'll take unrealistic gameplay any day, thank you.

    Optional PvP = No PvP
  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,530Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by grimgryphon
    You're not doing those kind of moves with leather gear either. Visit any Renaissance Fair and ask one of the wandering rogues how heavy leather gear can be.

    The issue is usually that Renaissance Fairs tend to be full of - how should I put this - people that have not really seen the inside of a gym in years.

    all joking aside, I agree too much realism would kill the fun

     

  • JakdstripperJakdstripper logan lake, BCPosts: 2,126Member Uncommon

    realism can stop short of giving me bruises or making me bleed at the keyboard.

     

    no but seriously, if the game's theme is "medieval realism" then i expect A LOT of realism. if the theme is "Flying monkey fairies" then i expect A LOT of unrealism.....just pick you theme and be true to it.

  • 3-4thElf3-4thElf Elftown, MEPosts: 489Member

    Ultima Online's attempt, modernized, with some aspects that Rockstar Games is known for.

    That's the amount I'd like.

    a yo ho ho

  • WizardryWizardry Ontario, CanadaPosts: 8,444Member Uncommon

    I want realism and a lot of it but not realism as in REAL life but realism as something that COULD be possbile.I mean gaming in general is not realism but no reason the concepts can`t be.

    Example i don`t like seeing games that have mages shooting flames like a minigun.The concept of flames should be a conjuring idea,to conjure them from the elements or the sky and take a bit of time.

    One thing i would like to see is not so much aiming but the ability to take cover,i don`t like attacks bending around corners or going through walls.I do however enjoy splash damage and would like to see more of it.

    For the most part games do a decent job on realism,it is only the odd time i see some really ridiculous ideas.


    Samoan Diamond

  • CuathonCuathon University City, NYPosts: 2,211Member
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by grimgryphon
    You're not doing those kind of moves with leather gear either. Visit any Renaissance Fair and ask one of the wandering rogues how heavy leather gear can be.

    The issue is usually that Renaissance Fairs tend to be full of - how should I put this - people that have not really seen the inside of a gym in years.

    all joking aside, I agree too much realism would kill the fun

     

    Have you ever been to a RenFaire? Or did you just watch a shitty movie using geek culture as a punchline? Those people at RenFaires who can walk around in real historically accurate plate armor are much stronger than some preppy gym rat.

    The people who are serious about RenFaires walk the Appalachian trail with 40 pound backpacks. Or go cross country in Iceland.

    Walk 100 miles in 8 days with a 40-50 pound backpack and having to set up and take down your own camp and cook your own food every day.

    Then you can make fun of people at the RenFaire.

    I won't hold my breath.

  • itchmonitchmon west islip, NYPosts: 1,714Member Uncommon

    that's an awesome question Kyleran.

     

    made me think.  on forums!  I KNOW RIGHT?

     

    I love the games that i perceive as being more "worldlike" than "gamelike"... i dont think i ever really sat down to quantify what traits make up "worldlike" to me soooo without further adieu..

     

    1) there needs to be an open path to move through the world.   this as opposed to the "themepark" style of unveiling the game world a little bit at a time through channeling the players from hub to hub.  EX: eve online ... after those first tutorial missions the game basically says, hey, its a big world out there.  here are the ways you can find what you need but we arent going to lay out a path to guide you.

     

    2) there needs to be freedom of action however there also needs to be consequences for "sociopathic" actions.  this one is a killer for me.  again let me reference eve.  in eve you have the freedom to be a horrific murderer of innocent miners.  it's a world like game after all an just as in the "real world" nothing is *physically* going to stop someone from being violent towards someone else.  HOWEVER since, again, eve is world-like, there are in game police who monitor the space lanes of eve and issue security hits (and sometimes summary execution) for acts of rampant douchery.  this punishment is part of what keeps eve from degenerating into a nothing-but-pvp fest.

     

    3) i'm going to use eq2 for this example.  you need to be able to have a place to call your own.  note i didnt expressly say housing because in games like eve you can have soverignty with your alliance in a few systems which is kinda-sorta like having a place of your own.  but to me the classic example of this is eq2 (SWG and vanguard too i hear but i didnt really play those).  Eq2 is very good at letting you have a good load of tools to design your own space and then keep it as private or as public as you wish.  especially now where you are allowed to design your own piece of ornamental fun and submit it to eq2 and even have them put it in the cash shop to make a wee bit of royalty off of your idea ^^.

     

    4) there should be freedom of opportunity.  by this i mean that, should you want to do nothing but make stuff that should be fine.  but if if you want to be a jack-of-all trades that's fine too.  there should be activities in the world-like game that make it so you dont feel like you "have to" do one thing or another at the "end-game".  as a matter of fact...

     

    5) there should NOT be a percievable "wall" between the character building phase of the game and the "endgame".

     

    thanks for reading!

     

    itch

    RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.

    Currently Playing EVE, DFUW

    Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.

    Dwight D Eisenhower

    My optimism wears heavy boots and is loud.

    Henry Rollins

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,994Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by grimgryphon
    Originally posted by Icewhite
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    We see a lot of threads and posts decrying the loss of "virtual worlds" and I'm certainly one of the guilty parties in this regards, but I got to thinking, just what makes a MMORPG more realistic yet at the same time remain fun?

    Unrealistic PVP (i.e. no consequence, instant respawn, dive right back in to fight some more).  Rambo-movie level of unrealistic, else video-game pvp just doesn't work.

    Pretty much required for PVP at all, isn't it?  Even the games that brag about the 'realism' of their pvp don't have posses of citizens chasing them everywhere (bounty systems at least begin to approach the problem, I guess).

    We won't even begin to catalog the thousands of ways PVE departs from "realism" in the name of fun.

     

    ^ This

    Do people here remember the movie Excalibur? It was lambased for having boring fight scenes. John Boorman went for the realistic route, and did his research to back it up. He showed us how a fight really would be like with 40lbs of plate armor strapped to someone's body and a claymore weighing up to 7 lbs in their hand.  Sorry, but you're just not doing backflips and multi-attack hits with that kind of gear. You're not doing those kind of moves with leather gear either. Visit any Renaissance Fair and ask one of the wandering rogues how heavy leather gear can be.

    I'll tell you what. Let's get a game designer to build us a PvP game that operates on real-world principles and physics. You swing your sword...maybe hit something...and then rest until you can gather enough strength to do it again 45 seconds later. Two or three minutes for each fight and no one wins because both parties are too damn tired to continue.

    Oh and when you're injured and can't fight any longer? You lay right where you are until someone can drag you away and tend to your wounds until you are ready to fight again. Let's say 72 hours later...or possibly days...or weeks.

    Let's not forget that when you're dead, you're dead. The end. No rez for you.

    I'll take unrealistic gameplay any day, thank you.

    And yet, I myself would prefer more realistic combat like you describe above (and really liked Excalibur btw) and wish factors like that prevented things like bunny hopping, you know, like a stamina pool that dropped rapidly if you hopped around, but went down more slowly for steady combat swings. That way a player would have to manage his stamina pool carefully, and when he ran out..yep, he was pretty much done for.

    The 2nd half of your post takes it to the point of hyperbole, of course I don't want to have to lay around for 3 days to recover, (but 10 to 20 minutes like we did in early DAOC was fine).   Permadeath? No thank you, goes along with my original comment of not wanting to have to relieve myself as a game mechanic. (not so fun to have to do in RL either) image

    There can and should be a balance between realism and fantasy, to varying degrees of course, and I was mostly interested in what sort of game mechanics make a MMORPG more of a virtual world to you, not so much how realistic certain mechanics are.

     

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,782Member Uncommon

    I'm not a fan of realistic permadeath.

    For travel speed, it depends greatly on the game.  If you need to get a group to do a dungeon, I don't want to wait half an hour for the group members to arrive at the dungeon entrance.  But if a game economy is based around shipping goods around and having different local prices in different parts of the world, then instant travel will break that.

    You know what I want that would be realistic?  A round world.  No more developers joining the Flat Earth Society.  Make it light on one side of the world and dark on the other, and which "side" is light changes smoothly as time passes.

  • aleosaleos na, INPosts: 1,863Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    I'm not a fan of realistic permadeath.

    For travel speed, it depends greatly on the game.  If you need to get a group to do a dungeon, I don't want to wait half an hour for the group members to arrive at the dungeon entrance.  But if a game economy is based around shipping goods around and having different local prices in different parts of the world, then instant travel will break that.

    You know what I want that would be realistic?  A round world.  No more developers joining the Flat Earth Society.  Make it light on one side of the world and dark on the other, and which "side" is light changes smoothly as time passes.

    Oh how i've wanted that for so long.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member

    Personally i think fun is paramount. Realism, at most, only add some atmosphere.

    So the design should ALWAYS start from a gameplay experince point of view. If possible, add some realism for atmostphere, but never start from being real.

    Games are NOT about being real. Nothing is real. We can't throw fireballs, we can't run on walls, we can't teleport. It is about fulfilling those fantasies of being powerful, killing monsters, finishing dangerous missions.

    So anything that can make the game experience better is a good thing in my book: LFD, LFR, cross realm grouping, fun combat, instances.

    Don't ask me to wait 20 min becuase it is real. Donn't ask me to talk to 20 people before i can make a trade because it is real like that in the 5th century.

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,994Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Personally i think fun is paramount. Realism, at most, only add some atmosphere.

    So the design should ALWAYS start from a gameplay experince point of view. If possible, add some realism for atmostphere, but never start from being real.

    Games are NOT about being real. Nothing is real. We can't throw fireballs, we can't run on walls, we can't teleport. It is about fulfilling those fantasies of being powerful, killing monsters, finishing dangerous missions.

    So anything that can make the game experience better is a good thing in my book: LFD, LFR, cross realm grouping, fun combat, instances.

    Don't ask me to wait 20 min becuase it is real. Donn't ask me to talk to 20 people before i can make a trade because it is real like that in the 5th century.

    Generally speaking, these things run contrary to the concept of more realistic virtual worlds, and tend to make them less so.

    Arguably they make the game more fun for some people, perhaps many, but there's no denying they decrease the level of realism or how much a title might better simulate a virtual world.

    Of course these games are all not real, but there can be varying levels of realism depending on the specific game mechanics.

    Making you travel 20 minutes for no reason makes no sense of course, but if by doing so permits other players the opportunity to ambush you and take your stuff, then perhaps it is a viable mechanic. (and of course, you have the opportunity/responsbility to counter their efforts to do so) 

     

     

     

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by DMKano

    The more realism the better...

    can you imagine having you main tank die of a heart attack during a final dungeon raid boss fight?

    or hearing that your character can't raid anymore because he got Alzheimer's.

     

    epic

    Wouldn't realism result in the tank unable to hold the bosses attention for hours with a simple neenerneener?

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Personally i think fun is paramount. Realism, at most, only add some atmosphere.

    So the design should ALWAYS start from a gameplay experince point of view. If possible, add some realism for atmostphere, but never start from being real.

    Games are NOT about being real. Nothing is real. We can't throw fireballs, we can't run on walls, we can't teleport. It is about fulfilling those fantasies of being powerful, killing monsters, finishing dangerous missions.

    So anything that can make the game experience better is a good thing in my book: LFD, LFR, cross realm grouping, fun combat, instances.

    Don't ask me to wait 20 min becuase it is real. Donn't ask me to talk to 20 people before i can make a trade because it is real like that in the 5th century.

    Generally speaking, these things run contrary to the concept of more realistic virtual worlds, and tend to make them less so.

    Yes. And i state very clearly that i don't care for "realistic" virtual worlds, if it is not a fun game.

    Arguably they make the game more fun for some people, perhaps many, but there's no denying they decrease the level of realism or how much a title might better simulate a virtual world.

    Preciesly. I am one of that many. And once again, no one is arguing they don't decrease realism. Just that i don't care for realism.

    Of course these games are all not real, but there can be varying levels of realism depending on the specific game mechanics.

    "can" != "should"

    Making you travel 20 minutes for no reason makes no sense of course, but if by doing so permits other players the opportunity to ambush you and take your stuff, then perhaps it is a viable mechanic. (and of course, you have the opportunity/responsbility to counter their efforts to do so) 

    NOt care for that kind of gameplay. In fact,

    1) open world pvp is not popular.

    2) even with open world pvp, a boat ride of 20 min (like that in EQ) has no gameplay except staring at the screen.

    3) That is just an example. Don't put non-fun gameplay in my GAME just because it sounds real.

     

     

     

     

  • aspekxaspekx Brandon, FLPosts: 2,167Member

    as the OP alludes to 'realism' in an mmo is a difficult subject. i believe personally that there is a direct inverse relation between realism (as in imitates the actual world) and playability + enjoyability. in other words the more realistic you get the less fun and the less playable a game becomes.

    what is needed is a means of imitating the root experiences that help immerse us in a world of any kind. flying clockwork dragons are not a problem if the participant is given the opportunity or tools to become immersed.

    there is really only one rule for fictional universes wether you are discussing scifi or fantasy. and that is the rule of consistency. is this fictional world self referentially consistent at every turn?

    when speaking of a gaming universe i would add what i said above about root experiences. perhaps the word archetype is being enlarged a bit in its definition when i say that certain archetypal experiences are encountered by human beings across both space and time. what are they and how would one go about including them in a virtual world, is the question.

    finally, and i believe this is something oft overlooked, there is a devil in the details. there is something at work in the small things we experience in virtual worlds that make it somehow feel more complete. these small details pack a power disproportianate to their size. which can make them incredibly useful and potentially easy to create and weave into our experiences in virtual worlds of all kinds.

    "There are at least two kinds of games.
    One could be called finite, the other infinite.
    A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
    an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
    Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,207Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by itchmon

    that's an awesome question Kyleran.

    made me think.  on forums!  I KNOW RIGHT?

    I love the games that i perceive as being more "worldlike" than "gamelike"... i dont think i ever really sat down to quantify what traits make up "worldlike" to me soooo without further adieu..

    1) there needs to be an open path to move through the world.   this as opposed to the "themepark" style of unveiling the game world a little bit at a time through channeling the players from hub to hub.  EX: eve online ... after those first tutorial missions the game basically says, hey, its a big world out there.  here are the ways you can find what you need but we arent going to lay out a path to guide you.

    2) there needs to be freedom of action however there also needs to be consequences for "sociopathic" actions.  this one is a killer for me.  again let me reference eve.  in eve you have the freedom to be a horrific murderer of innocent miners.  it's a world like game after all an just as in the "real world" nothing is *physically* going to stop someone from being violent towards someone else.  HOWEVER since, again, eve is world-like, there are in game police who monitor the space lanes of eve and issue security hits (and sometimes summary execution) for acts of rampant douchery.  this punishment is part of what keeps eve from degenerating into a nothing-but-pvp fest.

    3) i'm going to use eq2 for this example.  you need to be able to have a place to call your own.  note i didnt expressly say housing because in games like eve you can have soverignty with your alliance in a few systems which is kinda-sorta like having a place of your own.  but to me the classic example of this is eq2 (SWG and vanguard too i hear but i didnt really play those).  Eq2 is very good at letting you have a good load of tools to design your own space and then keep it as private or as public as you wish.  especially now where you are allowed to design your own piece of ornamental fun and submit it to eq2 and even have them put it in the cash shop to make a wee bit of royalty off of your idea ^^.

    4) there should be freedom of opportunity.  by this i mean that, should you want to do nothing but make stuff that should be fine.  but if if you want to be a jack-of-all trades that's fine too.  there should be activities in the world-like game that make it so you dont feel like you "have to" do one thing or another at the "end-game".  as a matter of fact...

    5) there should NOT be a percievable "wall" between the character building phase of the game and the "endgame".

    thanks for reading!

    itch

    Thank you for writing that itch.  That describes a lot of what I enjoy in a gaming world.  I don't want realism, like the Excalibur, example above.  I want immersion and engagement.

    I'm looking for well thought out, integrated, deep engaging systems that add a life-like quality to the game world.  Unrealistic combat is fine by me.  I enjoy movies, stories, and books with exciting battles like Lord of the Rings, Couching Tiger, Avatar the Last Airbender (animated), but what else makes those stories come alive for me is the environment.

    I'm also looking for that system to offer "non-stabby" content, or to expand on point 4, the freedom of opportunity should include valid character building that doesn't focus solely on genocide.  That should also mean that someone could adventure as a warrior type (I mean that in the loosest possible sense - some who battles) and as a merchant and as an explorer and as a diplomat, or focus on any of those (or others).

    While all of the points made are important, the fifth point, is one I think should be foundational.  You can't build the rest of the house if the foundation is weak.  If the game rockets the player to cap and then there is a completely different game to play at that point, it just breaks any sense of cohesion that has been established.

«134
Sign In or Register to comment.