Today, I wanted to resurrect that tradition by writing Why Not: New Cap City.
How appropriate that you should speak of resurrection.
I can't bring myself to watch Caprica - not after having enjoyed 4 seasons of BSG and then in the final episode being lumped with "it was all god". Monotheism is fine if you're into that sort of thing, but bible-bashing masquerading as sci-fi doesn't sit well with some people.
Funny thing really - just before this jaw-dropping final episode aired, plans were announced for a Battlestar Galactica movie that bears no relation to the re-imagined bible-bashing version. Mmmmmmm.
And Caprica doesn't seem to be rating terribly well.
Some people watch the show so it has a fanbase. But as an IP for MMO development, this one comes with stigma - or maybe that should be stigmata - attached.
You're completely missing the point of the discussion. It's not about using Caprica as an IP, but taking the idea of New Cap City, which just happens to be from Caprica, and making an MMO like New Cap City. Nothing to do with anything outside of that virtual world & the rest of the story of Caprica.
face of mankind has a pay per death system- you have to purchase clones with in game currency and if you die with no clones or in game money your character dies and gets wiped from the system
I like the idea of new cap city. It would be sandbox for sure. From what I saw anything goes you make your own rule set. No leveles you just gain abilities.
You want to fly a virper you fly one, you want to kill things kill them.
I am not sure about the permadeath of the game and how that would work. Posibly you would create a new avitar and possibly get some of youabilities back.
I think new cap city would be great, however I would love a bsg game better with space flight and killing cylons.
face of mankind has a pay per death system- you have to purchase clones with in game currency and if you die with no clones or in game money your character dies and gets wiped from the system
Thanks for the information, I've removed that from my list of games I'd like to try. The idea of perma death is not one I'll ever support.
I only read the OPs post so i might be repeating something.
First off, id like to play in a virtual world. However theres some problems with the idea laid out here (My oppinion anyways).
Permanent Death and Payments:
I like the idea, i like it alot, but.. If you take real money from people each time they die, youll run into a problem verry quickly. Some people have alot of money, and the rest dont.
If you only give them a certain amount of lives, lets say 30/month, then you get the same problem again. The rich people will make multiple accounts, and the less fortunuate will not. And theyll prolly be pissed.
Actual permanent death. How will this work in a virtual world? You have to coustomize youre character over and over? Just save a character as a template and use it over?
What will the actual punishment be if you take all youre items/property and give them to a character you never use? In a real sandbox you should be able to do most things based on youre REAL skills. NOT ingame "numeric" skills. So HOW can you really punish a "blank" character?
By stealing a bit of theyre time? Thats the best thing i can come up with. THe worst possible fate of an immortal is to suffer pain, locked in an unescapable prison. Maybe thats a good idea? You go to prison when you screw up? Maybe breaking out/breaking youre friends out of prison is a fun activity?
Virtual Worlds vs The Real World:
Today you can play some games that looks pretty real. If you make a virtual world based on a real one, and it looks real theres a problem.
First off, a humans mind dont remember things clearly. Well most of us dont anyways. So if you live 2 lives, one is real and the other is virtual and they both share the same space you might mix the two. You create memories, during night youre head think/dream about your "experiences".
If you have done something that makes you associate something with something else then you remeber THAT thing most clearly in mind. So if you eat alot of virtual apples, and dont eat them in the real world youre likely to remember the virtual one first.
Lets say you live in New York, and thats the virtual world you live in to. If they two are verry similar that might mess with youre brain. I have no backing for saying this at all, but think about it. It looks pretty real, you talk to real people. You walk down the same street, you may visit youre house/appartment and talk to youre real life friends.
In books and games the people that "plain-walk" different dimentions typicaly end up mentaly insane. If theres any truth to the ideas of writers..
Again i have no real backing for saying this, iam not a shrink. Iam just tossing some things on the table. You may bash it, or laugh
Iam all for a big fat sandbox with lots of possibilities. But somewhat sceptical to a direct mirror of reality.
"I'd just like to see more games that focus on the world, and giving the people in it more of a role, im tired of these constant single player games that you can walk around with millions of people."
Originally posted by Asheram lol then you misunderstood me the making kids goes beyond just profligating it is in the realm of procreating you have to spend time raising nurturing caring for in a sense to get them to respect you its just not a bought and paid for idea but one that you have to spend time and energy on putting input into it and what not your direct purpose being heir to all you own if you die but the way you raise him/her has an affect on the person you are when you take over the npc etc
How's that different from playing the Sims then? That's practically all you do and it would take away considerably from actual gameplay of any game that would utilize this method. The points I was trying to make is that the idea would be exploited and abused. Everyone would create huge families with like 8 or 9 children in the game to safeguard their future.
Due to the exploitation required for trying to secure your game experience, I can easilly see where the nurturing the children would become the game experience itself and would take away from the main point from the game. It'll end up feeling like more work and less play.
I also pointed it out as a cheap excuse to not utilize a pay-by-death business model, which reflects many common consumers idea that they want as much of everything for as little as possible.
Ummm, for this whole "Pay Per Death" system it really comes down to the resurrection cost.
I think the first caveat is that there would be no monthly subscription.
I don't know how many times you wierdos die in an MMO per month but for me it ain't many outside of PvP.
So if you're charging $0.01 that's 1,500 deaths per month before you reach the cost of an average sub. At $0.10 per rez you're getting 150 deaths equal to an average monthly sub cost.
I think a nickel, or $0.05, is about right as that'll give you 300 deaths per month, or about 10 deaths per day, or roughly one death per 2.5 hours of gameplay.
So before you freak out over the system consider the actual, and only, variable in such a system: the cost of a single resurrection. If it's reasonable a good, non-retarded MMO player (I know there aren't many of us) could theoritically be saving a lot of money with such a system.
I know I die very litte, even when PvPing. I know when to run. And if I was paying to come back each time you can bet your fanny that I'd be running away even more.
So it's really the players here... for some reason most of y'all are conditioned to repudiate anything that doesn't constitute an all acess pass in the form of a monthly sub.
I'd welcome the hell out of a "Pay Per Death" system. Perhaps it would deter players that I normally don't enjoy being around from playing altogether.
Ummm, for this whole "Pay Per Death" system it really comes down to the resurrection cost.
I think the first caveat is that there would be no monthly subscription.
I don't know how many times you wierdos die in an MMO per month but for me it ain't many outside of PvP.
So if you're charging $0.01 that's 1,500 deaths per month before you reach the cost of an average sub. At $0.10 per rez you're getting 150 deaths equal to an average monthly sub cost.
I think a nickel, or $0.05, is about right as that'll give you 300 deaths per month, or about 10 deaths per day, or roughly one death per 2.5 hours of gameplay.
So before you freak out over the system consider the actual, and only, variable in such a system: the cost of a single resurrection. If it's reasonable a good, non-retarded MMO player (I know there aren't many of us) could theoritically be saving a lot of money with such a system.
I know I die very litte, even when PvPing. I know when to run. And if I was paying to come back each time you can bet your fanny that I'd be running away even more.
So it's really the players here... for some reason most of y'all are conditioned to repudiate anything that doesn't constitute an all acess pass in the form of a monthly sub.
I'd welcome the hell out of a "Pay Per Death" system. Perhaps it would deter players that I normally don't enjoy being around from playing altogether.
Win.
Ok... But this type of system establishes a perverse incentive on the part of the Dev's, as well as being a gankers/griefers heaven. Whats to prevent them from playing games with server side variables(shaving some off here, adding some there), to increase the death margin?
Thats leaving entirely aside the serious issue of human nature as expressed by gankers and griefers. Roaming packs of gankers would be killing everything that moves(unless you always roam around in a pack yourself). I don't know about others, but I'm not always on at the same time as the rest of my guild. Does that mean I have to deal with the gank squads solo? And I'm PAYING for this "privilege"??...
Your entire post is predicated on in game "meanies" and an evil developer pushing danger on the player for the sake of increasing revenue.
For all the griefing and gankers it depends on the PvP rule set, doesn't it?
As for the evil corporation...? Uhhh, they're all trying to take your money in one way or another, buddy.
My post is based on REALITY as it exists, and as MMO history has demonstrated it to be. I said nothing about "evil corporations". People and corporations act in their self interest. You do understand the implications, and why perverse incentives in that regard are not wise? Of course they are after money(profit is after all the main motivator in business....). But its how they go about it that matters.
As for the "rule set" approach to ganking and griefing... Again, look at past history as an example of the never ending war between the Dev's and the gankers and griefers. The Dev's will also act in their self interest(to protect their business model). I direct your attention to the evolution of Concord(and high sec rules) in Eve Online as a great example of that dynamic. Sand box games sound great in theory, but in practice end up as a narrow niche(if that).
Originally posted by Aramanu2 you forgot that new cap city has perma-death, i.e 1 life and you can never go back. Who's gonna pay for that? no one.
but i do get what you mean, and i think in a few years time we might start seeing stuff like that as people get bored of current trends and decide to try new different things. Also the internet/computers need to get MUCH faster before we can start having huge non-instance/zoned worlds with 100's of people in one area. 2 games i know which allow huge amounts of people in one area both lag to hell and back when tons of people are in one area, Darkfall and EVE.
It is incredibly annoying to me when people obviously have not read the article, and make a post that clearly shows they do not fully understand what the writer was saying and that they would rather shoot off a snarky comment than respond to the idea behind the article.
As for what the article actually said, I would be all for it. This is a game that It hink a great many people would get behind. And the pay-per-death idea is just perfection. Not only do you have a steady revenue stream for a company without needed a subscription fee, but you add an element that would give PvP intenisty and suspense, and make the world a truly vibrant sandbox.
One of the reasons EVE works so well as a sandbox is because if you die, you are out some serious stuff. It is truly annoying to die. It is not like so many MMOs where death is not that bad (I remember using lava to short cut back to an entrance during my first time through Tortage in AoC). Death would be upsetting. When you kill a player, you know you have won something serious. And, as in New Cap City, people would be on good behaviour. You would see a great deal fewer morons spouting Chuck Norris whatever or yelling snide or hateful comments at others. You do that, you are going to be out some cash.
As for how much money, that is an extremely touchy and complicated thing. Too little and people would not care enough. Too much and you risk alienating a large portion of the playerbase. But having real anarchy in this way, without real punishment for death, would create an incredibly interesting social dynamic for a sandbox. I would buy any game doing something similar, just for the innovation and the taking of the risk.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I caught an episode for the first time yesterday, but long after I read this article. It's not bad, but kinda seems written by people who didn't quite grasp the current memes and apply where they could be going. It's almost like they reverted to tech-idioms you'd see in the 80's.
Anyway, what I saw was how they broke into a guy's vault and converted his cash to points. What can possibly be the point of that? To eventually bankrupt the economy through converting all the currency to points, then the player with the highest tally wins?
Doesn't seem like the idea can really go anywhere, and that they are making it up as they go along... but as a serious Lost fan, I know that sometimes it only seems that way until they blow your mind with expert forethought.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4 Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
mix both ideas, the hardcore death penalty like diablo 2 where a char that dies becomes a ghost and can never play again, and the idea of paying per death.
what do you get? a pay per character revenue, you die your character is lost forever, you want to play again? you have to pay, say what 20 cents? but since the game is so sandbox lawless and massive, you'll die plenty.
Say creating your character 5 times would cost you one dollar, 30 times (1 a day for each day a month) that would be 6 dollars, and thats if BY MIRACLE YOU ONLY DIE IN SUCH A LAWLESS GAME ONCE A DAY. Which would be impossible, so imagine dying an average of 5 times a day, thats 30 dollars a month of revenue per player, with that you don't even need to set up an item mall which would obviously upset the gamers and the very idea of the game. 30 dollars monthly per player minimum, and players would surely be happy with the setting, imagine that...............
Hell they could make a 2 days trial where you pay with your credit card a small amount only so it registers your card and that way people cant abuse the trial, and in that 2 days trial make your acc being able to create characters for free so you can get a feel for the game.
Just imagine the real revenue such a concept could achieve!!, i mean face it, more than half the morpg community turns PK sooner or later, whether its permanently or not. People would flock by the millions to play a Caprica like that :O
mix both ideas, the hardcore death penalty like diablo 2 where a char that dies becomes a ghost and can never play again, and the idea of paying per death.
what do you get? a pay per character revenue, you die your character is lost forever, you want to play again? you have to pay, say what 20 cents? but since the game is so sandbox lawless and massive, you'll die plenty.
Say creating your character 5 times would cost you one dollar, 30 times (1 a day for each day a month) that would be 6 dollars, and thats if BY MIRACLE YOU ONLY DIE IN SUCH A LAWLESS GAME ONCE A DAY. Which would be impossible, so imagine dying an average of 5 times a day, thats 30 dollars a month of revenue per player, with that you don't even need to set up an item mall which would obviously upset the gamers and the very idea of the game. 30 dollars monthly per player minimum, and players would surely be happy with the setting, imagine that...............
Hell they could make a 2 days trial where you pay with your credit card a small amount only so it registers your card and that way people cant abuse the trial, and in that 2 days trial make your acc being able to create characters for free so you can get a feel for the game.
Just imagine the real revenue such a concept could achieve!!, i mean face it, more than half the morpg community turns PK sooner or later, whether its permanently or not. People would flock by the millions to play a Caprica like that :O
Very, very doubtful in the west. Perhaps in Asia. But in the west, this type of game would have really limited appeal, as has been demonstrated time after time with the Asian imports. Games that allow ganking or griefing are not tolerated well these days in the west. I have no idea why people continue to confuse the two different gaming cultures.
Its like you say, but there are few instances of games like that succeding, and even in games that aren't like that you tend to find a great amount of players that only play for ganking.
I mean i know I exagerated but the game would be unique so by that itself it would surely draw out people. Im not into pking out of the blue but i would definitly play like that, and the idea of a completly sandbox morpg with no levels sounds interesting. Ofcourse It'd have to cost less than what i said since a game like this encourages ganking.
The only real issue is that most ganking players play F2P afaik, if you haven't seen that many pkers its probably because you don't play on many private servers, but like i said F2P players would be the issue, its not like they can those F2P gankers to start playing, they are basically F2P for one reason or another, either lack of $ or age for a credit card. Thats why i think you aren't exactly wrong, maybe in how you say it but not in what. At least i don't believe it'd have limited appeal in the west.
Also consider this, since the game would have no subscription and the creation of a character would be so cheap there would be lots of people playing sporadicaly, like, a person w a good computer that cant affoard a subscription (IE me lol) but still has a credit card, after all with this system the most interesting part is that you decide how much you pay, and no matter how much you pay you still have the same odds of dying as the next guy who spent 10 times what you did, since there would be no item mall and levels.
Also there wouldn't be that much grieving. If you say that ur missing half the point, yes people might band together to gank, but the main cause of grieving in morpgs due to gankin is midgame / endgame players bashing on new players. That concept is impossible here, since there would be no levels or premium items.
If you cant imagine, or grasp the concept of a fair sandbox game where there is no edge except strength in numbers, I don't think you can conceive the potential of such game.
Also there wouldn't be that much grieving. If you say that ur missing half the point, yes people might band together to gank, but the main cause of grieving in morpgs due to gankin is midgame / endgame players bashing on new players. That concept is impossible here, since there would be no levels or premium items.
If you cant imagine, or grasp the concept of a fair sandbox game where there is no edge except strength in numbers, I don't think you can conceive the potential of such game.
"Fair sand box game"?? What does "fair" have to do with this? "Fair" is a subjective value judgement(usually backed up by the power to impose ones view of "fair" on others when one speaks of larger groups, such as governments). How do you conceive that "fairness" is going to be in such a game, if not imposed by the Dev's(as in the concept of high sec and Concord in Eve online)?
This type of thing quickly devolves into various ganking/griefing groups preying on those who are weaker than they are. I've seen that way too many times, to have any interest what so ever in taking part in such a game again. These types of games may sound good (to some) in theory, but the reality quickly pales for all but a tiny number of people who get their jollies from such.
Comments
You're completely missing the point of the discussion. It's not about using Caprica as an IP, but taking the idea of New Cap City, which just happens to be from Caprica, and making an MMO like New Cap City. Nothing to do with anything outside of that virtual world & the rest of the story of Caprica.
face of mankind has a pay per death system- you have to purchase clones with in game currency and if you die with no clones or in game money your character dies and gets wiped from the system
I like the idea of new cap city. It would be sandbox for sure. From what I saw anything goes you make your own rule set. No leveles you just gain abilities.
You want to fly a virper you fly one, you want to kill things kill them.
I am not sure about the permadeath of the game and how that would work. Posibly you would create a new avitar and possibly get some of youabilities back.
I think new cap city would be great, however I would love a bsg game better with space flight and killing cylons.
Thanks for the information, I've removed that from my list of games I'd like to try. The idea of perma death is not one I'll ever support.
In theory it sounds absolutely amazing. I doubt it would play out like that in real life though.
I Liked the Caprica series quite a bit. It took me by surprise.
I only read the OPs post so i might be repeating something.
First off, id like to play in a virtual world. However theres some problems with the idea laid out here (My oppinion anyways).
Permanent Death and Payments:
I like the idea, i like it alot, but..
If you take real money from people each time they die, youll run into a problem verry quickly.
Some people have alot of money, and the rest dont.
If you only give them a certain amount of lives, lets say 30/month, then you get the same problem again. The rich people will make multiple accounts, and the less fortunuate will not.
And theyll prolly be pissed.
Actual permanent death. How will this work in a virtual world? You have to coustomize youre character over and over? Just save a character as a template and use it over?
What will the actual punishment be if you take all youre items/property and give them to a character you never use? In a real sandbox you should be able to do most things based on youre REAL skills. NOT ingame "numeric" skills.
So HOW can you really punish a "blank" character?
By stealing a bit of theyre time? Thats the best thing i can come up with.
THe worst possible fate of an immortal is to suffer pain, locked in an unescapable prison. Maybe thats a good idea? You go to prison when you screw up?
Maybe breaking out/breaking youre friends out of prison is a fun activity?
Virtual Worlds vs The Real World:
Today you can play some games that looks pretty real. If you make a virtual world based on a real one, and it looks real theres a problem.
First off, a humans mind dont remember things clearly. Well most of us dont anyways.
So if you live 2 lives, one is real and the other is virtual and they both share the same space you might mix the two.
You create memories, during night youre head think/dream about your "experiences".
If you have done something that makes you associate something with something else then you remeber THAT thing most clearly in mind. So if you eat alot of virtual apples, and dont eat them in the real world youre likely to remember the virtual one first.
Lets say you live in New York, and thats the virtual world you live in to.
If they two are verry similar that might mess with youre brain. I have no backing for saying this at all, but think about it. It looks pretty real, you talk to real people.
You walk down the same street, you may visit youre house/appartment and talk to youre real life friends.
In books and games the people that "plain-walk" different dimentions typicaly end up mentaly insane.
If theres any truth to the ideas of writers..
Again i have no real backing for saying this, iam not a shrink. Iam just tossing some things on the table. You may bash it, or laugh
Iam all for a big fat sandbox with lots of possibilities. But somewhat sceptical to a direct mirror of reality.
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/261448/page/5
"I'd just like to see more games that focus on the world, and giving the people in it more of a role, im tired of these constant single player games that you can walk around with millions of people."
- Parsalin
How's that different from playing the Sims then? That's practically all you do and it would take away considerably from actual gameplay of any game that would utilize this method. The points I was trying to make is that the idea would be exploited and abused. Everyone would create huge families with like 8 or 9 children in the game to safeguard their future.
Due to the exploitation required for trying to secure your game experience, I can easilly see where the nurturing the children would become the game experience itself and would take away from the main point from the game. It'll end up feeling like more work and less play.
I also pointed it out as a cheap excuse to not utilize a pay-by-death business model, which reflects many common consumers idea that they want as much of everything for as little as possible.
i'd play, bring it on.
Ummm, for this whole "Pay Per Death" system it really comes down to the resurrection cost.
I think the first caveat is that there would be no monthly subscription.
I don't know how many times you wierdos die in an MMO per month but for me it ain't many outside of PvP.
So if you're charging $0.01 that's 1,500 deaths per month before you reach the cost of an average sub. At $0.10 per rez you're getting 150 deaths equal to an average monthly sub cost.
I think a nickel, or $0.05, is about right as that'll give you 300 deaths per month, or about 10 deaths per day, or roughly one death per 2.5 hours of gameplay.
So before you freak out over the system consider the actual, and only, variable in such a system: the cost of a single resurrection. If it's reasonable a good, non-retarded MMO player (I know there aren't many of us) could theoritically be saving a lot of money with such a system.
I know I die very litte, even when PvPing. I know when to run. And if I was paying to come back each time you can bet your fanny that I'd be running away even more.
So it's really the players here... for some reason most of y'all are conditioned to repudiate anything that doesn't constitute an all acess pass in the form of a monthly sub.
I'd welcome the hell out of a "Pay Per Death" system. Perhaps it would deter players that I normally don't enjoy being around from playing altogether.
Win.
Ok... But this type of system establishes a perverse incentive on the part of the Dev's, as well as being a gankers/griefers heaven. Whats to prevent them from playing games with server side variables(shaving some off here, adding some there), to increase the death margin?
Thats leaving entirely aside the serious issue of human nature as expressed by gankers and griefers. Roaming packs of gankers would be killing everything that moves(unless you always roam around in a pack yourself). I don't know about others, but I'm not always on at the same time as the rest of my guild. Does that mean I have to deal with the gank squads solo? And I'm PAYING for this "privilege"??...
Lose.
Your entire post is predicated on in game "meanies" and an evil developer pushing danger on the player for the sake of increasing revenue.
For all the griefing and gankers it depends on the PvP rule set, doesn't it?
As for the evil corporation...? Uhhh, they're all trying to take your money in one way or another, buddy.
My post is based on REALITY as it exists, and as MMO history has demonstrated it to be. I said nothing about "evil corporations". People and corporations act in their self interest. You do understand the implications, and why perverse incentives in that regard are not wise? Of course they are after money(profit is after all the main motivator in business....). But its how they go about it that matters.
As for the "rule set" approach to ganking and griefing... Again, look at past history as an example of the never ending war between the Dev's and the gankers and griefers. The Dev's will also act in their self interest(to protect their business model). I direct your attention to the evolution of Concord(and high sec rules) in Eve Online as a great example of that dynamic. Sand box games sound great in theory, but in practice end up as a narrow niche(if that).
It is incredibly annoying to me when people obviously have not read the article, and make a post that clearly shows they do not fully understand what the writer was saying and that they would rather shoot off a snarky comment than respond to the idea behind the article.
As for what the article actually said, I would be all for it. This is a game that It hink a great many people would get behind. And the pay-per-death idea is just perfection. Not only do you have a steady revenue stream for a company without needed a subscription fee, but you add an element that would give PvP intenisty and suspense, and make the world a truly vibrant sandbox.
One of the reasons EVE works so well as a sandbox is because if you die, you are out some serious stuff. It is truly annoying to die. It is not like so many MMOs where death is not that bad (I remember using lava to short cut back to an entrance during my first time through Tortage in AoC). Death would be upsetting. When you kill a player, you know you have won something serious. And, as in New Cap City, people would be on good behaviour. You would see a great deal fewer morons spouting Chuck Norris whatever or yelling snide or hateful comments at others. You do that, you are going to be out some cash.
As for how much money, that is an extremely touchy and complicated thing. Too little and people would not care enough. Too much and you risk alienating a large portion of the playerbase. But having real anarchy in this way, without real punishment for death, would create an incredibly interesting social dynamic for a sandbox. I would buy any game doing something similar, just for the innovation and the taking of the risk.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
WTF? No subscription fee?
What an awsome idea!
New cap city would be a great base for an MMO
Its very new though so copywrite negotiations and deals might take a while if anyone was interested in doing it.
I caught an episode for the first time yesterday, but long after I read this article. It's not bad, but kinda seems written by people who didn't quite grasp the current memes and apply where they could be going. It's almost like they reverted to tech-idioms you'd see in the 80's.
Anyway, what I saw was how they broke into a guy's vault and converted his cash to points. What can possibly be the point of that? To eventually bankrupt the economy through converting all the currency to points, then the player with the highest tally wins?
Doesn't seem like the idea can really go anywhere, and that they are making it up as they go along... but as a serious Lost fan, I know that sometimes it only seems that way until they blow your mind with expert forethought.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
Pay per death, that would be sweet. great idea.
But i rather think i have a better idea.
mix both ideas, the hardcore death penalty like diablo 2 where a char that dies becomes a ghost and can never play again, and the idea of paying per death.
what do you get? a pay per character revenue, you die your character is lost forever, you want to play again? you have to pay, say what 20 cents? but since the game is so sandbox lawless and massive, you'll die plenty.
Say creating your character 5 times would cost you one dollar, 30 times (1 a day for each day a month) that would be 6 dollars, and thats if BY MIRACLE YOU ONLY DIE IN SUCH A LAWLESS GAME ONCE A DAY. Which would be impossible, so imagine dying an average of 5 times a day, thats 30 dollars a month of revenue per player, with that you don't even need to set up an item mall which would obviously upset the gamers and the very idea of the game. 30 dollars monthly per player minimum, and players would surely be happy with the setting, imagine that...............
Hell they could make a 2 days trial where you pay with your credit card a small amount only so it registers your card and that way people cant abuse the trial, and in that 2 days trial make your acc being able to create characters for free so you can get a feel for the game.
Just imagine the real revenue such a concept could achieve!!, i mean face it, more than half the morpg community turns PK sooner or later, whether its permanently or not. People would flock by the millions to play a Caprica like that :O
Very, very doubtful in the west. Perhaps in Asia. But in the west, this type of game would have really limited appeal, as has been demonstrated time after time with the Asian imports. Games that allow ganking or griefing are not tolerated well these days in the west. I have no idea why people continue to confuse the two different gaming cultures.
Its like you say, but there are few instances of games like that succeding, and even in games that aren't like that you tend to find a great amount of players that only play for ganking.
I mean i know I exagerated but the game would be unique so by that itself it would surely draw out people. Im not into pking out of the blue but i would definitly play like that, and the idea of a completly sandbox morpg with no levels sounds interesting. Ofcourse It'd have to cost less than what i said since a game like this encourages ganking.
The only real issue is that most ganking players play F2P afaik, if you haven't seen that many pkers its probably because you don't play on many private servers, but like i said F2P players would be the issue, its not like they can those F2P gankers to start playing, they are basically F2P for one reason or another, either lack of $ or age for a credit card. Thats why i think you aren't exactly wrong, maybe in how you say it but not in what. At least i don't believe it'd have limited appeal in the west.
Also consider this, since the game would have no subscription and the creation of a character would be so cheap there would be lots of people playing sporadicaly, like, a person w a good computer that cant affoard a subscription (IE me lol) but still has a credit card, after all with this system the most interesting part is that you decide how much you pay, and no matter how much you pay you still have the same odds of dying as the next guy who spent 10 times what you did, since there would be no item mall and levels.
Sorry for double posting
Also there wouldn't be that much grieving. If you say that ur missing half the point, yes people might band together to gank, but the main cause of grieving in morpgs due to gankin is midgame / endgame players bashing on new players. That concept is impossible here, since there would be no levels or premium items.
If you cant imagine, or grasp the concept of a fair sandbox game where there is no edge except strength in numbers, I don't think you can conceive the potential of such game.
"Fair sand box game"?? What does "fair" have to do with this? "Fair" is a subjective value judgement(usually backed up by the power to impose ones view of "fair" on others when one speaks of larger groups, such as governments). How do you conceive that "fairness" is going to be in such a game, if not imposed by the Dev's(as in the concept of high sec and Concord in Eve online)?
This type of thing quickly devolves into various ganking/griefing groups preying on those who are weaker than they are. I've seen that way too many times, to have any interest what so ever in taking part in such a game again. These types of games may sound good (to some) in theory, but the reality quickly pales for all but a tiny number of people who get their jollies from such.