It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
The whole Pay-to-Test angle reminds me of an old Benny Hill bit (Americanized here).Nyctelios said:Even that I love to see this project progress I really don't like this "feedback from payers" approach. Game testers followed procedures and were qualified for the job.. Those people just paid.
DMKano said:Maurgrim said:This are a question for those who started the MMOs back in late 90s and early 00s.
What did you think back then how the future of MMOs would evolve and how much right and wrong are you today?
I started with UO in 1998 and EQ1 in march 1999.
Other than improving graphics I didnt have a clue how the gameplay would improve, but I thought that mmorpgs would move away from simple and antiquated "hitpool" and "damage" die roll mechanics to something that resembles real life simulation (when you punch someone or shoot somone in real life, there are no hitpoint bars or damage numbers)
I always thought that real life physics, ecosystems and organism simulations would be what mmorpgs would be like - not anytime soon due to massive compute power that would require.
So completely wrong.
But I also had no idea how my lifestyle would change and how much family life with work and kiddo schedules would change how I play games.
Never thought about that either back in 98/99 - I always assumed that I would have most of my day to devote to gaming.
Was completely wrong too.
I also never considered how I would change as a person and that I would lose desire to spend 10 hours raiding which at one point back in early 2000s I thought was amazing.
Zero desire to ever do that again today.
So again very wrong.
Am I happy with the direction that its going?
Well gaming is going on all directions, so yes I am very happy. There is a larger variety of games being made by more people today than at any other point in history.
I am having more fun gaming today than back in 98/99 due to so many different games.
Never been a better time
than right now.
MadFrenchie said:I expected more progress in the form of AI to populate these world's with more life-like NLC inhabitants. Factions warring independent of player input, dynamically attacking, defending, and counterattacking one another. A world alive that the player is dropped into to play a role in.
I wonder what companies are waiting on the results of this committee, and which companies will incorporate these recommendations and practices into future products? My guess is that these guidelines will be fall in line far behind 'profitability' as priorities go. If it makes money, then they'll see about conforming with these standards and practices, but only as far as it doesn't hurt the bottom line.Superman0X said:No need to be suspicious. This is an industry think tank designed to put together solutions to the current problem... the angry mob. They will come up with best practices, and white papers that will help developers avoid this in the future. Companies don't like to be seen as the bad guy, and with proper practices, they will not be.Mendel said:Interesting. But once I look beyond the moralistic aspects of this type of committee, what companies are going to take actions on these findings? How are they going to change games in response to this committee, or is this just an industry catch-all that game companies can point to and say 'they said it was okay' or 'we did not find any problems with a particular practice'.
Maybe I'm just in an extra-cantankerous mood today, but I'm always skeptical when a group steps forward to regulate the actions and thoughts of others.