It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by AlBQuirky The EQ Landmark is interesting. I just have to wonder how much "professionally designed" aspects could be created with all the time devs will have to take to go through all of the player created content.
I don't like the idea of devs being in the business of selecting designs. It's not just about efficient use of resources, it's a fundemental lack of trust in players, a lack of tools for groups of players to create their own community standards that balance freedom vs judgement.
Originally posted by Neo_Viper Letting players create most often doesn't work because many are either immature, childish, or just non respectful of the lore and don't care about the integrity of the world they create for, or simply just completely lack talent (but often still think they are great).
I agree with you. After all, what is the most popular creative MMO out there? Probably Second Life and it lets people create whatever they want and... well, look at it. There is another one out there called Furcadia and people can create "dreams" and last time I was on there, the vast majority of "dreams" were pornographic. Just handing out tools to make things to people who are absurdly immature is not a good idea. Besides, in an MMORPG, you'd have to limit the things that can be created to those things that are completely neutral. You couldn't let people make powerful weapons or the like or the balance of the entire game would be shot. If it's just making the weapons look different, there's only limited value in that, and let's be honest, you'd have people running around with giant penis swords in no time flat.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots moreRelatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots moreNow Playing: NoneHope: None
Originally posted by Zorgo
....said the person whose plane didn't fly - to Orville and Wilbur.
Out of how many that tried to and over how many thousands of years.
Like I said, .the odds are just not there for most games.
If you want to hang your game on a '1% chance' go ahead but just know the odds.
Gdemami -Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
It depend what "tools" you give them and how you allow they share it with other.
MMORPGs prefer "lego bricks tools" where you allow player to play (created) with the "bricks" that made by you while follow your rule (system laws)
It mean what ever they created , they can't bend or get over the "laws".
"world creator" type tools are worst for MMORPGs , thing just pop out from no nothing and player create they our laws.
Originally posted by jpnz Originally posted by Zorgo
I'm struggling to understand your motivation in making this thread. You think it won't work.
Ok. So why are you now trying to sell this idea to others? Do you need their validation? It's not like someone at SOE is going to read it and go "Oh we'd better pull the pin on the entire Landmark project then". Are you just trying to discourage others from being interested in it? For what gain? Why did you make this thread?
Originally posted by iixviiiix It depend what "tools" you give them and how you allow they share it with other. MMORPGs prefer "lego bricks tools" where you allow player to play (created) with the "bricks" that made by you while follow your rule (system laws) It mean what ever they created , they can't bend or get over the "laws". "world creator" type tools are worst for MMORPGs , thing just pop out from no nothing and player create they our laws.
That's a good way of putting it. I was trying to think of a good response to the direction this thread took, and you got it.
It's not like we want an MMO where players can create flying penises. We want players to be able to create cities and social sphere's, guilds, and orders. But all within the context of the game.
Once upon a time....
The very best example by far was Epic games Unreal series all with a released editor and tools to create endless content.
That is why the series and game engine took off,the difference however is that series relies on individual servers and uploading/dling content.
In the MMORPG genre most games are chap with weak tools,weak game engines,there is no real chance to make anything really good.In the Unreal series you could even load/create your own texture sets,mesh,objects ect ect,so basically create a whole new game.
Neverwinter was an example of a real cheap toss in idea and what SOE is doing is no more than a glorified Minecraft idea,while adding in cape designs and very little else.SOE tries to play it up as amazing and endless ideas but is far from the truth.
Unless a developer can think of a way to mimic what Epic games did and in the mmorpg or even the sci-fi genre,we will not see anything top notch.I also did not mention that the Unreal engines allowed users to create outside the game and import via various formats.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Originally posted by Beatnik59 City of Heroes had a lot of ways for players to create things: 1) The base editor allowed players to create hotels, city blocks, spaceships, lairs, arcane sanctuaries, parks and so on. I can't tell you how involved some of the designs were. 2) The costume creator was a wonderful tool to create robots, soldiers, superheroes, beastmen, ghosts and so many other personalities. 3) The Architect Entertainment system was loved by roleplayers and average players alike to create story arcs that the regular lore didn't support. In fact, at the end, I'd have to say that City of Heroes was the most "creator friendly" retail MMO from a major publisher. And it worked, splendidly.
I did not know COH could do this,i saw the core game and was turned right off.Are the building creations actually useful with insides and does the engine utilize movers,particle effects ect ect and other quality tools?
I might add i was turned off by the low end textures,could it load new hd textures or perhaps animated ones?You make it sound as good as Epic Games UNREAL engine,if so i would love to buy the game just to fiddle with creating content.
Originally posted by Raven322
Same reason why we have 'give people tools and not another wow-clones' thread.
This is a factual look at that statement and ask 'how feasible is it? What does it mean in reality?'
If the reality check isn't what you'd thought it will be, tough. Reality suddenly doesn't become fiction just because you 'wish' for it to be.
Originally posted by jpnz
This is a factual look at that statement and ask 'how feasible is it? What does it mean in reality?' If the reality check isn't what you'd thought it will be, tough. Reality suddenly doesn't become fiction just because you 'wish' for it to be.
Sorry but I read your original post as opinionated complaining not factual evidence. OK, so you think spending a lot of time on EVE alliances or the UO player auction house is a waste of time and don't understand why people are interested in doing that kind of thing. That is not a "fact" that "proves player created content doesn't work"; it's simply your opinion about a certain type of game content you don't happen to like.
Same goes for the people complaining about Second Life or whatever, saying "I don't like what a lot of people created" is not the same thing as saying that allowing players to create things "doesn't work"
Originally posted by jpnz Originally posted by Raven322
So no real reason at all then.
There's nothing factual about this thread. You've provided a single game as reference. Numerous others have been presented in a counter. You've ignored them.
What does marketing speak mean in reality? It means whatever the listener desires to hear. you will not change it. Present all the facts that you want, nobody will listen, because they hear what they want to. Even should you be proven right in the long run, no-one will credit you for it.
There's no reality check here to be had.
This post makes some pretty weird conflicting logic and then goes into some sort of self-projection of some kind.
Fascinating in a funny (but a bit sad) kind of way.
Second line says 'nothing factual' and then accepts there is a 'reference' to my original post. Huh?
Then the 3rd paragraph is some sort of weird statement about 'no one will hear you anyways' or something.
I am totally fine that no one is disputing my original statement though.
My point is there was a science to making the plane fly - once that was figured out, making airplanes got a lot easier.
Just as EVE or Minecraft has found a formula that makes sandboxes viable, all which needs to be done is to implement a working formula and new ones will work.
It may have taken years for folks to figure out the 'give-the-players-the-tools' theory - but the theory has worked out and been proven, therefore it CAN be done again.
But if you are thoroughly convinced it can never ever work or ever ever should be tried, take comfort that you can go around and instead of claiming, "If God wanted man to fly he would have given us wings" with:
'If God wanted man to play in a sandbox he would have given us shovels for hands".
Minecraft just got another update! I'm waiting on Everquest Next. Neverwinter had a good idea but put morons in charge of it so it failed.
Creation in mmo's rock all. Power to the people!
The creative features need to fit within the bounds of the game and the universe. These are the designs that usually work. Neverwinter proved that a "tacked on" creative mode is just a joke and at best a novelty and offers no real addition to the game other than that.
A creative mode should be used to add to the experience of the game and that will make it infinitely more successful, otherwise it will add nothing in the long term to sustain players interest.
I can understand the direction of this thread and I agree, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink so to speak. It is a good idea on paper but it is up to the developer initially to have a good design and implement the resources in an intelligent way, otherwise it's just a waste of time and nothing more than a novelty. I hate that player creativity is getting whored out as a slogan myself as at its core it is indeed a great asset to gaming though i'm sure the industry will beat it in till it is a husk of its former.
Players shouldn't waste their time on half conceived player "tools" it is a waste of time and energy for all involved and a concept that will overall drain creativity instead of creating it which is why it was created in the first place, but hey if we let big companies see $$$ what is to stop them?
Player tools = great idea, but the majority of the time poor implementation.
I'm told that minecraft counters my opinion which doesn't make sense. Especially since those posters have asserted (violently) that 'Minecraft / LoL / D3 isn't an MMO!' in other threads.
EVE makes sense yes which is why I referenced it.
Just watch the link and tell me how many games will have that many players dedicate over 400 hours a week in out-of-game time to sustain a game design?
That 400 hours is also voluntary.
I'm not bashing GSOL nor am I saying EVE is bad. All I'm saying is that the amount of effort required is not something that posters around here who just say 'give players tools!' would realize.
Yes virginia, I too wish 'YES WE CAN' slogans cure all ills.
Originally posted by jpnz Just watch the link and tell me how many games will have that many players dedicate over 400 hours a week in out-of-game time to sustain a game design?
It's not how many hours each person spends, it's how much that dedication adds to the game as a whole.
Even the most complex game needs to still offer some sort of enjoyable experience to a casual visitor. But at the same time, the complexity of a game doesn't have to stop at the shortest attention span.
Originally posted by maplestone
A game design that requires your playerbase to put in 1600+ hours a month outside the game is probably a niche one (an extremely small niche) and not something your average poster on this site would realize.
Does it have to be 'casual friendly'? Maybe.
Does it have to be 'hardcore put in more hours than a person would spend at work?' Maybe.
But a game design catering to that hardcore? Ehh..... YMMV but my guess is, 'good luck cause you'll need it and lots of it'.
You probably need a few "uber-hardcore people who want a second job" people. There are certainly people like that leading the alliances in EVE, but no one is forcing them to do that. There are people who like to do that (even though it isn't really something I would want). Those leaders allow the majority of the players to get that cool feeling of huge alliance warfare with a much smaller time investment. It's a little like the F2P "whale" concept only with time instead of money.
It's probably hard for the guy with 2 gaming hours a week to get the most out of these kind of games but you don't *need* to spend 10 hours a day on them to enjoy them either as long as a couple of people in your group are willing to put in that crazy time investment. Of course these games also usually offer other ways to contribute as well other than being part of one of the very hardcore alliances.
Originally posted by jpnz A game design that requires your playerbase to put in 1600+ hours a month outside the game is probably a niche one (an extremely small niche) and not something your average poster on this site would realize.
You seem to be equating the concept of a person finding 1600+ hours of effort productive with the concept of everyone being required to put in that much effort. Is that your intention?
It ruined the world gameplay of city of heroes for me.