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!

Why is there only one MMORPG where you can play as a dragon?

2

Comments

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,980Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Razeekster
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    If you want to share armors between all of the different races, then it's a lot easier if the races are all shaped similarly.  Pants on a mermaid won't work, for example.  You can stretch a given texture to fit similarly shaped races that are fatter or skinner, or taller or shorter.  But trying to fit a texture to a race that is topologically different just isn't going to work.

    If you wanted all of the races to be shaped like a mermaid, with a fish tail instead of legs, then it wouldn't really be any harder than making all of the races be the usual humanoid shape of two arms, two legs, and a head.  The same is true if you wanted all races to have four arms instead of two, or all races to have wings instead of arms.  But how accepting would players be of a game where none of the characters looked terribly anthropomorphic?

    Another alternative would be for each race in the game to only have a few armor styles, so that you don't need to share armor looks between races.  If you're going to have 50 armors and 10 races in total, then it's not really any harder to have 5 armors available to each race with races that look very different than it is to have the same 50 armors available to all races.  But how accepting would players be of a game where there were only a few armor styles that your character could ever have?

    Also, a purely underwater game is probably a bad idea if it's going to have combat.  No one has yet figured out how to make undewater combat work very well, as far too often, you get attacked by something off the screen and have no idea where you're taking damage from.  That's fine if it's not going to be a combat-centric game, but that would mean you're wandering way off into niche territory.

    It's not that what you want can't be done.  It's that there are trade-offs that game developers typically aren't willing to make.

     

    So... The problem is that developers would have to work a bit extra hard to create different armors to fit different races... I really don't see a problem with that.

    It costs more money.....and there's only so much budget to go around.  You may be understimating what it costs to create all those different armor options for multiple races.

    You might not have a problem with that, the people footing the bills do.

     

     

    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: 14,772Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Razeekster
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    If you want to share armors between all of the different races, then it's a lot easier if the races are all shaped similarly.  Pants on a mermaid won't work, for example.  You can stretch a given texture to fit similarly shaped races that are fatter or skinner, or taller or shorter.  But trying to fit a texture to a race that is topologically different just isn't going to work.

    If you wanted all of the races to be shaped like a mermaid, with a fish tail instead of legs, then it wouldn't really be any harder than making all of the races be the usual humanoid shape of two arms, two legs, and a head.  The same is true if you wanted all races to have four arms instead of two, or all races to have wings instead of arms.  But how accepting would players be of a game where none of the characters looked terribly anthropomorphic?

    Another alternative would be for each race in the game to only have a few armor styles, so that you don't need to share armor looks between races.  If you're going to have 50 armors and 10 races in total, then it's not really any harder to have 5 armors available to each race with races that look very different than it is to have the same 50 armors available to all races.  But how accepting would players be of a game where there were only a few armor styles that your character could ever have?

    Also, a purely underwater game is probably a bad idea if it's going to have combat.  No one has yet figured out how to make undewater combat work very well, as far too often, you get attacked by something off the screen and have no idea where you're taking damage from.  That's fine if it's not going to be a combat-centric game, but that would mean you're wandering way off into niche territory.

    It's not that what you want can't be done.  It's that there are trade-offs that game developers typically aren't willing to make.

     

    So... The problem is that developers would have to work a bit extra hard to create different armors to fit different races... I really don't see a problem with that.

    Imagine if you're funding a game, and the developers come to you saying, we'd like an extra $10 million for artwork so that we can create a bunch of race-specific armors for a bunch of differently shaped playable races that make it so that different races don't have to share armors.  No sir, this won't have any effect on gameplay itself, but only artwork.  Yes, an extra $10 million beyond the initial budget is what we decided it would cost to animate all of of the new armors that we want.  No, this isn't a cost overrun; this is a new feature we want you to fund.  No, this doesn't mean that feature creep is going to lead us to asking for an extra $200 million by the time we're done with it.

    So, do you give them the extra funding, or tell them to just make the races shaped more similarly to save money, like just about every other game on the market does?

    Again, it's about trade-offs.  I'm not saying that having wildly different playable races is a bad idea.  But there are real sacrifices that you'd have to make to allow it, and less character customization on a given budget for any individual character is a big trade-off.

  • pmw4friendpmw4friend lawrenceville, GAPosts: 63Member
    If you would ask the person who's founding the project for $10 mill just for art work, I would see the conversation going a little like this :

    Hey sir I would like $10 mil, to create extra armor to fit the different types of races.
    Sponsor "would it have a tremendous affect on the game?"
    No
    "Would it get us more players? "
    Maybe
    "Well sir, I'm sorry but there is no way in hell ill spend $10 mil on bulls***, so get the f*** out of my office. "


    No one will waste money on something that isn't going to make them more money.
  • nbtscannbtscan Phoenix, AZPosts: 774Member Uncommon
    I hope FFXIV: ARR adds a draconic race.  There was a poll taken a while back asking what new races people would be interested in and this came up as one.  Unfortunately one of the other options was for a bipedal mammilian race which everyone interpreted as "Viera" and a majority the weeaboos voted for it.  :/  I don't get why people wouldn't be interested in something new instead of something from an older game.
  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,314Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Depending on the race, visible armor may not be needed like dragons in Istaria.

    And how accepting would players be of "there's no visible clothing, so your character will look the same forever with little customization"?  Some players would be fine with that, but again, it's about trade-offs.

     Depending on the race very accepting.  Some races/animals just don't look good with armor, Istaria's dragons are one of them.  They still had armor, it just wasn't visible.  The customization wasn't in the looks (after the initial character creation anyway).

    The lack of visible armor on dragons was never a big point, some people said it but most didn't care.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member

    I'd see it as a fine chance to design a game that ran backwards.

    You start at the peak, the apex predator, and begin de-leveling (eventually reaching L0 unclassed serf). Or, I guess, for a dragon you delevel all the way back to the egg.

    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.

  • RazeeksterRazeekster Solon, MEPosts: 2,201Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by Razeekster
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    If you want to share armors between all of the different races, then it's a lot easier if the races are all shaped similarly.  Pants on a mermaid won't work, for example.  You can stretch a given texture to fit similarly shaped races that are fatter or skinner, or taller or shorter.  But trying to fit a texture to a race that is topologically different just isn't going to work.

    If you wanted all of the races to be shaped like a mermaid, with a fish tail instead of legs, then it wouldn't really be any harder than making all of the races be the usual humanoid shape of two arms, two legs, and a head.  The same is true if you wanted all races to have four arms instead of two, or all races to have wings instead of arms.  But how accepting would players be of a game where none of the characters looked terribly anthropomorphic?

    Another alternative would be for each race in the game to only have a few armor styles, so that you don't need to share armor looks between races.  If you're going to have 50 armors and 10 races in total, then it's not really any harder to have 5 armors available to each race with races that look very different than it is to have the same 50 armors available to all races.  But how accepting would players be of a game where there were only a few armor styles that your character could ever have?

    Also, a purely underwater game is probably a bad idea if it's going to have combat.  No one has yet figured out how to make undewater combat work very well, as far too often, you get attacked by something off the screen and have no idea where you're taking damage from.  That's fine if it's not going to be a combat-centric game, but that would mean you're wandering way off into niche territory.

    It's not that what you want can't be done.  It's that there are trade-offs that game developers typically aren't willing to make.

     

    So... The problem is that developers would have to work a bit extra hard to create different armors to fit different races... I really don't see a problem with that.

    Imagine if you're funding a game, and the developers come to you saying, we'd like an extra $10 million for artwork so that we can create a bunch of race-specific armors for a bunch of differently shaped playable races that make it so that different races don't have to share armors.  No sir, this won't have any effect on gameplay itself, but only artwork.  Yes, an extra $10 million beyond the initial budget is what we decided it would cost to animate all of of the new armors that we want.  No, this isn't a cost overrun; this is a new feature we want you to fund.  No, this doesn't mean that feature creep is going to lead us to asking for an extra $200 million by the time we're done with it.

    So, do you give them the extra funding, or tell them to just make the races shaped more similarly to save money, like just about every other game on the market does?

    Again, it's about trade-offs.  I'm not saying that having wildly different playable races is a bad idea.  But there are real sacrifices that you'd have to make to allow it, and less character customization on a given budget for any individual character is a big trade-off.

    Weird that money is coming up as a problem when it seems like most companies have plenty of cash to waste on the same ol same (example: SW:TOR had an estimated budget of $200 million dollars... If you can't create something awesome and unique out of that then I dont know what can).

    Smile

  • BahamutKaiserBahamutKaiser Hyattsville, MDPosts: 306Member
    Please spare us any more nonsensical examples with ridiculous figures quizzical, it does not cost 10 million dollars to fit armors on various creatures (I like the part where racial and class specific armor being common was completely discounted), as if you even need them, and your feature creep example includes the cost to launch 4 MMOs.... A huge number of art assets are already used to make up the game world, enemies, structures, and animations, many already used on these creatures because the exist as foes. And many foes exist with multiple reskins anyway.

    A creature would often not wear armor, and a character creator for them would probably be the biggest investment, one far less prohibitive than you suggest. Games already use a great deal of custom dye options and coloring your beast as well as certain creatures wearing equipment is not that complex.

    And before we hear another nonsensical example of abstract figures with no bearing... Any cost to make an MMO for whatever content is pitched can be presented as a liability as well as an asset. The vast number of highly anticipated, seemingly infallible IPs that have failed show testament that no special feature, IP or acclaimed archetype is above failure.

    Doesn't matter if your FF, Star wars, Richard Garret or Obama, your making an investment. And I'm certainly not accepting quizzicals personal disbelief as anything but blindness. Sorry, but misplaced conviction and fabricated limitations don't amount to anything.

    I'd say let a professional validate the subject, but we all know how consistently successful their judgement is, so nobodies qualified to make a statement for certain, I don't know why I would settle for the wild assumption of a random poster...

    Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
    That way, if they get angry, they'll be a mile away... and barefoot.

  • BahamutKaiserBahamutKaiser Hyattsville, MDPosts: 306Member

    And before any more ingenious arguments arise about the cost of unique creature characters and the incapability of doing it, Horizons did it before WoW grew the genre, and even with abysmal graphics and several developer trade overs, was able to survive even today on technology built a decade ago. Stop flashing ridiculously inaccurate figures in a feeble attempt to validate your disbelief.

    Any further nonsense on the subject will be met with screenshots of Horizons dragons customization variations and content links to the upcoming Dragon's Prophet game...

    Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
    That way, if they get angry, they'll be a mile away... and barefoot.

  • aRtFuLThinGaRtFuLThinG MelbournePosts: 1,133Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG
    Because dragons are typically op in rpgs. Can breath fire/acid/lightning/frost. Can cast spells. Is resistant to spells. Have darkvision. Have strong armor by default. etc. It is as bad as letting players play Beholder or Mind Flayer as a race.

     Just don't let them be that powerful.  In Istaria there isn't that issue, they can breath fire/lightnight/frost and fly but are no more resistant to magic/weapons than others and many bipeds outdmg them.

     If they are not powerful then they are shit dragons :(

    It will be like Beholder with no eyes, lol

     I guess thats one  way to look at it, another way is I guess the bipeds are just really powerfull.

     Well Dragonlance has draconians if you can live with that.

     

    Full blown dragons however... that like letting players be god (even if without god powers), because that's what dragons are usually identified with.

     

    It will be like letting play go straight to playing a Lich too without first earning the power to be a Lich.

     

    Maybe dragonhood should be a goal achievable in an mmo? Like how PCs can achieve godhood in Pathfinder RPG?

  • BahamutKaiserBahamutKaiser Hyattsville, MDPosts: 306Member

    Dragons are often depicted as whelps first, than would at some point be in an adolecent phase before growing to be 40 feet long. And the game doesn't even have to allow you to progress that far, a 15 to 20 foot dragon could pass, and massive unit trade offs could be considered as well if they did go large, like additional damage from AoE spells and easier target acquasition.

    Beyond that, a game with a multitude of character types could explore variant character development beginings, like WotLK, you could be made to achieve a certain amount with an alternate before starting with certain characters and begin at a different starting value.

    Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
    That way, if they get angry, they'll be a mile away... and barefoot.

  • nottykidnottykid Colorado Springs, COPosts: 15Member

    Because Dragons can not:

    1. Wear equips (unless they personify them, and that would be lame)

    2. Pick up items (where do you put that sword and what use is it)

    3. Limited skills (fly, fire breath, claw, tail whip...not much else without being redundent)

    4. Races (red dragon, green dragon, blue dragon...)

    5. No crafting

    6. What does the dragon fight? Would it feel wrong if it's HARD for the dragon to kill people?

    7. Every player deep down wants to feel important or reveared; hard to be AMAZING, when everyone is.

     

    So no loot, no/limited customization, no crafting, unrewarding progression (few skills),  plot would have difficult "end game"

    so what OTHER things did i not mention that define an MMO.

  • ArduArdu Hallandale, FLPosts: 55Member
    It would be pretty epic if an avatar could transform into a dragon. 
  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,314Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nottykid

    Because Dragons can not:

    1. Wear equips (unless they personify them, and that would be lame)

    2. Pick up items (where do you put that sword and what use is it)

    3. Limited skills (fly, fire breath, claw, tail whip...not much else without being redundent)

    4. Races (red dragon, green dragon, blue dragon...)

    5. No crafting

    6. What does the dragon fight? Would it feel wrong if it's HARD for the dragon to kill people?

    7. Every player deep down wants to feel important or reveared; hard to be AMAZING, when everyone is.

     

    So no loot, no/limited customization, no crafting, unrewarding progression (few skills),  plot would have difficult "end game"

    so what OTHER things did i not mention that define an MMO.

    In Istaria dragons start out as hatchlings, and are pretty week.  AFter so many days played, hoard size, adventure adn level you can become an adult, much bigger and can fly.  later you can become an ancient, again much bigger and can fly.  The bipeds can multiclass

    Istarian dragons do have hammer just not visible,

    A lot of skills, a dozen different melle, few dozen different spells.

    They can pick up itms, they put them in dimensional pockets.

    They are no dragon races.

    Tons and tons and tons and tons of crafting, spells, scales, you can even dig out your lair.

    Fights the same thing as all the other players.

    So tonnes of loot, tons of crafting, very rewarding progression, lots of skills.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • BahamutKaiserBahamutKaiser Hyattsville, MDPosts: 306Member

     


    Originally posted by nottykid

    Originally posted by BahamutKaiser  A game could have dragons, griffins, sphinx, and giant mythical birds, all sharing the sky and battling, along with humanoid characters of equivalent power, like angels, demons, Vampires, and more.
    Not gonna keep repeating myself because people don't wanna accept solutions.

     

    Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
    That way, if they get angry, they'll be a mile away... and barefoot.

  • BrixonBrixon Myrtle Beach, SCPosts: 259Member

    Well isn't it obvious, in the post WoW world developers won't deviate too far from the WoW formula. After all these years we are finally seeing developers starting to make three sided PvP games again, so maybe there is some hope they will start to broaden their horizons and break the WoW mind set.

    Ah Horizons the first MMO I got to beta test. Good to see nothing changes as developers still refuse to listen to the beta testers when they tell them it's not ready. I really did love the ability to play a dragon though.

  • aRtFuLThinGaRtFuLThinG MelbournePosts: 1,133Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by BahamutKaiser

     


    Originally posted by nottykid

    Originally posted by BahamutKaiser  A game could have dragons, griffins, sphinx, and giant mythical birds, all sharing the sky and battling, along with humanoid characters of equivalent power, like angels, demons, Vampires, and more.
    Not gonna keep repeating myself because people don't wanna accept solutions.

     

     Well you can't really consider what you said a solution because people don't even consider this a problem - including the game devs.

    Game devs wants to make things base on lores that people can commonly identify with.

    They kinda have the right to make what they want.

    People who don't believe dragons should be played are just such, and they seems to be majority.

    You can't convince people to "believe" otherwise when it is a matter of like or dislike.

    Got a feeling that a lot of people probably dn't like to see dragons walking around town, all the time, and doing dance and shit. Enough people have been hating on pandas already.

    Devs can realise something like that, but rest asserted it won't ended up being Coke, probably ended up somewhere like Onion-flavoured soda. lol

  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAPosts: 4,472Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    If you want to share armors between all of the different races, then it's a lot easier if the races are all shaped similarly.  Pants on a mermaid won't work, for example.  You can stretch a given texture to fit similarly shaped races that are fatter or skinner, or taller or shorter.  But trying to fit a texture to a race that is topologically different just isn't going to work.

    If you wanted all of the races to be shaped like a mermaid, with a fish tail instead of legs, then it wouldn't really be any harder than making all of the races be the usual humanoid shape of two arms, two legs, and a head.  The same is true if you wanted all races to have four arms instead of two, or all races to have wings instead of arms.  But how accepting would players be of a game where none of the characters looked terribly anthropomorphic?

    Another alternative would be for each race in the game to only have a few armor styles, so that you don't need to share armor looks between races.  If you're going to have 50 armors and 10 races in total, then it's not really any harder to have 5 armors available to each race with races that look very different than it is to have the same 50 armors available to all races.  But how accepting would players be of a game where there were only a few armor styles that your character could ever have?

    Also, a purely underwater game is probably a bad idea if it's going to have combat.  No one has yet figured out how to make undewater combat work very well, as far too often, you get attacked by something off the screen and have no idea where you're taking damage from.  That's fine if it's not going to be a combat-centric game, but that would mean you're wandering way off into niche territory.

    It's not that what you want can't be done.  It's that there are trade-offs that game developers typically aren't willing to make.

     Well, another way to deal with it is using AS.  For something like the mermaid leg armor could be put on but the AS would remain mermaid resulting in bonuses of the item but keeping the old look.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,314Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by waynejr2
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    If you want to share armors between all of the different races, then it's a lot easier if the races are all shaped similarly.  Pants on a mermaid won't work, for example.  You can stretch a given texture to fit similarly shaped races that are fatter or skinner, or taller or shorter.  But trying to fit a texture to a race that is topologically different just isn't going to work.

    If you wanted all of the races to be shaped like a mermaid, with a fish tail instead of legs, then it wouldn't really be any harder than making all of the races be the usual humanoid shape of two arms, two legs, and a head.  The same is true if you wanted all races to have four arms instead of two, or all races to have wings instead of arms.  But how accepting would players be of a game where none of the characters looked terribly anthropomorphic?

    Another alternative would be for each race in the game to only have a few armor styles, so that you don't need to share armor looks between races.  If you're going to have 50 armors and 10 races in total, then it's not really any harder to have 5 armors available to each race with races that look very different than it is to have the same 50 armors available to all races.  But how accepting would players be of a game where there were only a few armor styles that your character could ever have?

    Also, a purely underwater game is probably a bad idea if it's going to have combat.  No one has yet figured out how to make undewater combat work very well, as far too often, you get attacked by something off the screen and have no idea where you're taking damage from.  That's fine if it's not going to be a combat-centric game, but that would mean you're wandering way off into niche territory.

    It's not that what you want can't be done.  It's that there are trade-offs that game developers typically aren't willing to make.

     Well, another way to deal with it is using AS.  For something like the mermaid leg armor could be put on but the AS would remain mermaid resulting in bonuses of the item but keeping the old look.

     I don't know what AS stands for but what you described is essentially the way the dragons in Istaria are, they can wear the armor and get the stat and bonuses but you just can't see it.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,117Member Uncommon
    I'm tired of humanoid races.  Bring on the dragons, centaurs, harpies, manticores, griffins, sphinxes, merfolk, wyverns, phoenixes....etc.  Imagination is one of the truly underused attributes in this genre.

    image
  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,117Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by Razeekster
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    If you want to share armors between all of the different races, then it's a lot easier if the races are all shaped similarly.  Pants on a mermaid won't work, for example.  You can stretch a given texture to fit similarly shaped races that are fatter or skinner, or taller or shorter.  But trying to fit a texture to a race that is topologically different just isn't going to work.

    If you wanted all of the races to be shaped like a mermaid, with a fish tail instead of legs, then it wouldn't really be any harder than making all of the races be the usual humanoid shape of two arms, two legs, and a head.  The same is true if you wanted all races to have four arms instead of two, or all races to have wings instead of arms.  But how accepting would players be of a game where none of the characters looked terribly anthropomorphic?

    Another alternative would be for each race in the game to only have a few armor styles, so that you don't need to share armor looks between races.  If you're going to have 50 armors and 10 races in total, then it's not really any harder to have 5 armors available to each race with races that look very different than it is to have the same 50 armors available to all races.  But how accepting would players be of a game where there were only a few armor styles that your character could ever have?

    Also, a purely underwater game is probably a bad idea if it's going to have combat.  No one has yet figured out how to make undewater combat work very well, as far too often, you get attacked by something off the screen and have no idea where you're taking damage from.  That's fine if it's not going to be a combat-centric game, but that would mean you're wandering way off into niche territory.

    It's not that what you want can't be done.  It's that there are trade-offs that game developers typically aren't willing to make.

     

    So... The problem is that developers would have to work a bit extra hard to create different armors to fit different races... I really don't see a problem with that.

    Imagine if you're funding a game, and the developers come to you saying, we'd like an extra $10 million for artwork so that we can create a bunch of race-specific armors for a bunch of differently shaped playable races that make it so that different races don't have to share armors.  No sir, this won't have any effect on gameplay itself, but only artwork.  Yes, an extra $10 million beyond the initial budget is what we decided it would cost to animate all of of the new armors that we want.  No, this isn't a cost overrun; this is a new feature we want you to fund.  No, this doesn't mean that feature creep is going to lead us to asking for an extra $200 million by the time we're done with it.

    So, do you give them the extra funding, or tell them to just make the races shaped more similarly to save money, like just about every other game on the market does?

    Again, it's about trade-offs.  I'm not saying that having wildly different playable races is a bad idea.  But there are real sacrifices that you'd have to make to allow it, and less character customization on a given budget for any individual character is a big trade-off.

    Part of the current issues with MMORPGs is the lack of design effort by the developers and it shows in the end product.  Low quality game design is getting harder and harder to tolerate for most gamers and they just don't give a damn about the costs and if the developers can't figure out a way to improve on design and keep it cost effective, then the future of this genre is definitely in trouble.  Shifting the genre back and forth based mainly on combat mechanics will only placate the masses for a short while.  Eventually they are going to have to make changes to basic design principles or lose the audience altogether.  Which do you think is the greater cost in that scenario?

    image
  • BahamutKaiserBahamutKaiser Hyattsville, MDPosts: 306Member
    Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG
    Originally posted by BahamutKaiser

     


    Originally posted by nottykid

    Originally posted by BahamutKaiser  A game could have dragons, griffins, sphinx, and giant mythical birds, all sharing the sky and battling, along with humanoid characters of equivalent power, like angels, demons, Vampires, and more.
    Not gonna keep repeating myself because people don't wanna accept solutions.

     

     Well you can't really consider what you said a solution because people don't even consider this a problem - including the game devs.

    Game devs wants to make things base on lores that people can commonly identify with.

    They kinda have the right to make what they want.

    People who don't believe dragons should be played are just such, and they seems to be majority.

    You can't convince people to "believe" otherwise when it is a matter of like or dislike.

    Got a feeling that a lot of people probably dn't like to see dragons walking around town, all the time, and doing dance and shit. Enough people have been hating on pandas already.

    Devs can realise something like that, but rest asserted it won't ended up being Coke, probably ended up somewhere like Onion-flavoured soda. lol

    Sorry, but I'm not really concerned about what seems to be a majority, or relying on trying to persuade customers who already have adequate products rather than appealing to an alternate as well as shared fan base.  Doing what players "want" is just jargon for trying to copy what's already making money but will actually fail because an uninspired knock off isn't even as good as the original.

    There are plenty of people who want to play as more spectacular cretures, I mean there are a slew of ridiculous looking races in WoW which range from unattractive, to silly, to imitation creatures already. There are games with Angels and Demons holding strong because people like to play as ultimate powers. And playing as a variety of Dragons and other mythical creatures in conglomeration will naturally blend to be a game with variety. I perfer Dragons, but a game that is going to go into creature characters should have a large selection of them, and have a whole sub set of character development, environments, communities and behaviors wrapped around them...

    Why the hell would Dragons be busy about non dragon communities?, and why do people keep raising concerns that can be addressed by themselves with a moments thought?

    The funniest thing is, I've seen very little of this community of people who refuse dragons, just a few players claiming that there are so many people who can't accept them.  Most don't care, and my experience has introduced me to more people direstly interested than those amused with coming up with capricious disapprovals. The only people who have an adamant concern about the use of dragons as characters are ones that don't want their particular game to be adapted to them, they don't care if a game is made for others who have a different preferance, no mature person would.

    You know what the funniest thing is about those who disapprove?, they always claim that some demographic they have no material to support or some cost that has no accurate foundation for is a reason why others can't have what they want, instead of personally explaining what they don't like about it. The exact same argument was used 10 years ago when people challenged the need to rely on a trinity and the inability to make combat more intense or action oriented. But people who do want it can plainly state that it is there preferance, and they'd like a game. Sorry, but I didn't by that foolishness a decade ago, and I'm certainly not going to buy it now after history has documented the mountain of failures based on that closed mindedness and the eventual success of such features.

    That kind of thinking is why Korea took over the evolution of MMOs, Westerners wern't confident in different gameplay, sales methods, or mechanics.

    Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
    That way, if they get angry, they'll be a mile away... and barefoot.

  • aRtFuLThinGaRtFuLThinG MelbournePosts: 1,133Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by BahamutKaiser

    Sorry, but I'm not really concerned about what seems to be a majority, or relying on trying to persuade customers who already have adequate products rather than appealing to an alternate as well as shared fan base. 

     YOU are not concerned, but the developers are though.

    Unless YOU are making the game... you can't really ask developer to "make this make that".

    They kinda have the creative freedom to make whatever they like since it is THEIR project, THEIR effort, and THEY get the funding, not YOU.

    And I'm sure THEY care about getting a return on THEIR investments.

     

    Lol.

    Loooooool.

     

  • TheRealBanangoTheRealBanango Fairfax, VAPosts: 75Member
    I can't believe no one has mentioned his bird mmo idea........it's amazing, I bird simulator where you can build nests and fly around exploring the world with your friends!!! You could be an eagle in the forest, a parrot in the jungle or a pidgeon in the city! Imagine you and your friends are geese and have to coordinate to fly in a v formation in order to gain speed LOL!!!! I would so play that game.

    image
  • TheRealBanangoTheRealBanango Fairfax, VAPosts: 75Member
    And to the dragon thing, do it like in Star Wars battlefront where if you did well you could unlock the chance to be a Jedi and tear things up for a certain amount of time.
    A player would have to unlock the chance to be a dragon somehow. Once you're the dragon you can do dragon things like fly around, terrorize other players, try and burn down towns. The more succesful you are at doing these things, the more time you would get to be the dragon ( up to a cap of course). players could even kill you and loot your scales and bones for crafting materials.
    There wouldn't have to be a point to it because games are supposed to be fun and being a powerful dragon sure as hell would be fun. It's not the fact that you think there has to be a dragon as a playable race, you just feel the urge to be a dragon and tear it up for a little, and knowing how powerful a dragon is I'm sure you understand why you couldn't be a dragon forever, so just tear it up for a little then be on your way :)

    image
2
Sign In or Register to comment.