Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
We want full open world, not instanced! And first post!
evemaster00
Member Posts: 171
We want full open world, not instanced!
Why does richard garriot think ex UO players want anything less than an actual WORLD where all players are able to interact with each other? Be it for good, or for bad. It's the ups and downs that makes for the best experience.
Comments
The whole Kickstarter looks to me like an attempt to jump on the bandwagon and get some easy cash. I am puzzled by the design decisions and the lack of vision. It is not even an mmo, its more of the facebook generation pseudo online games we have seen in recent years. Lobby or world map with instanced multiplayer but mostly made for solo play.
I am disappointed Lord British!
This is not a MMORPG...
****
Will this be a MMO? Can I play with my friends?
Single Player Online (SPO)
In the SPO mode you connect to the server, receive content updates, and can see the long term changes others are having on the world. However, you are not visible on anyone else’s screen, nor for grouping, and you don’t see anyone else in the world. You can switch from SPO to FPO or OPO modes whenever you like while in a city or overland map. Some parts of the main storyline quests may temporarily force the player into SPO mode for some parts of the quest.
Friends Play Online (FPO)
In friends play online, you only see people you have flagged as friends in the game and only they can see you. Like single player, this is just a server side filter. For those who prefer the quieter game with friends or maybe for those who prefer a more focused role playing experience, this lets you enjoy a more limited online experience. You can switch to SPO or OPO modes whenever you like while in a city or in the overland map.
Open Play Online (OPO)
In OPO players will see everyone that the server thinks they should see. This will not necessarily be all people in the area but should be people you care the most about based on what we believe is their relevance to you.
****
Its an RPG with a couple of different multiplayer options...
So no this is not UO 2, think of it more as a continuation of the origional ultima games.
No, no we don't. Don't pretend to speak for everyone as you don't.
What we want is a fun playable game ie relatively lag free. Not a game where theres a 100 people in one small area with 20 idiots dancing on a mail box and enough lag, and rubber banding that its takes 10 mins to do a 1 min walk or task.. Not a game where you have to wait in line behind several other groups to finally kill a boss mob, and certainly not not a game that while you and your guild group are exploring that secret lost ruin your group has monster trains running by every 5 mins like grand central station because some players either can't get groups of their own or just like griefing groups
I think Richard Garriot has lost his way. He used to be an innovator but now he seems to just be an imitator so I dont expect much from this game. Guy is a "has been".
My gaming blog
wait there what is this game imitating ? I dont re-call playing game that has these kind of features...
Well imitator is maybe not the correct word but he does seem to have given up on MMOs and not trying to create a sucessor of UO but rather a single/lmited multiplayer game. And that is going backwards, from UO, not forwards.
My gaming blog
Funny thing about those nine games was that they were all open world too!
Anyway, I find it odd that a lot of the people defending TESO for not being like TES is that one is an MMO and the others are single player games yet they are also here arguing the opposite...
What are open worlds?
Companies have lost the meaning of it.. they will promote something as an open world yet have 50 different channels/hubs on that same world.
I cant play any game that uses channels. if i play on a server i want to see everyone playing on that server in my world. playing a mmorpg is meaningless if you will never see any of the players again that you just played with. on top of that communities always suck in these type of games. it doesnt matter what you do it cant be used against u since the people you said/did it to will never be seen again.
You are making arguments which are not part of the discussion here. I am talking about working on UO and creating a successor for it. Obviously a non MMO would not be that and I dont see how my post history has anything to do with the fact that this guy did create the grandfathers of sandbox MMOs and it would make sense to build on that.
My gaming blog
You're puzzled because it doesn't fit the MMO mold. Hopefully this clears things up for you:
It's not an MMO. It's a singleplayer/multiplayer RPG.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Well if only he would be catering to either UO or the single player game fans. Instead, it seems to be some kind of hybrid with the boredom of MMOs and the social aspects of a facebook game.
What does FFA PvP have to do with this? He is talking about having an OPEN world, not an instanced one...and few UO players would say FFA PvP was a bad idea...as for your comment about FFA games failing...I find that rather amusing seeing the popularity of FFA games in Asia topping all but WoW in he west. Nexon and NCsoft became the powerhouses they are today based on FFA games. But I do thank you for the red herring which has nothing to do with the topic.
C'mon, I know you understand the difference between what you wrote and what they say they are delivering.
Open Play Online (OPO)
In OPO players will see everyone that the server thinks they should see. This will not necessarily be all people in the area but should be people you care the most about based on what we believe is their relevance to you.
They are being clear about what they intend to deliver (not a MMORPG) no reason to muddy the waters.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"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
1. All FFA is forced...its Free For All.
2. The game was more popular before Trammel, so no, the majority disagrees...even Garriott says it was a mistake to allow it and Koster said it was a mistake to make it.
3. UOs population did not drop until Renaissance brought in Trammel, in 2000...EQ had been out for 2 years already. Nice try.
Asian games are irrelevant here? FFXI, FFXV, Tera, Lineage 2...Archeage is the second most hyped game on this site with Wildstar at #5 and they keep talking about Age of Wushu over and over again...
You grasp at straws because you have no ground to stand on.
You have a bad habit of doing nothing but arguing in circles and around what is said.
1. The topic is OPEN WORLD. NOT FFA.
2. FFA is FFA, to have options is NOT FFA.
I am not going to even bother touching on the rest of your post because you seem to be doing nothing but arguing for the sake of arguing and continually changing the talk points just to keep it going. /ending your thread hijacking now.
This is an incredibly good post.
Anyone who doesn't realize that Trammel was the best thing to happen to UO has no idea what good game design is - and further reinforces the point RG made that most designers really just suck.
The "highpoint" of UO was pre-Age of Shadows with Trammel/Felucca split and Faction Warfare in Felucca (Council of Mages FTW!) Post Renaissance UO was the highest point of player population despite what the trolls will tell you. It's fact. The game only declined after SWG and EQ2/WoW etc. in 2003-2004.
Healthy PvP population in Felucca, healthy PvE population in Trammel.
All open world, sandbox adventure.
What RG seems to be doing with the whole single/friend/open world choice thing is letting players play their way - which is design 101 people.
MMOs seem to have forgotten how much better a game does when you offer different server types/shards that are actually different and meaningful.
RG is also right - vast majority of the time the other "random" players you see in an open world add nothing to your gameplay experience - even ESO is picking up on this with their single-shard world and phasing/instancing based on personal preference.
It's good design.
Let the solo artists have their vast country w/o interference, give the groupers shared spaces, give the fighters targets and allies.
Complete integration and co-existance is impossible. All of human history has proved this time and time again.
There shouldn't be any excuses to former games like Ultima ,the developers SHOULD be trying to create what at least appears to be a WORLD.We know it is just game code,but games shouldn't act like game code.Warping players to instances is ridiculously lame game play,we can however accept the limitations of memory/cache/bandwidth to load zones.There is always the simple FACT the developer can design variations on quality based on players and objects,so instances are not needed.
If a developer creates a game that is so shallow,where every single player is lead throguh the exact same linear questing path,then it is the game that is at fault,that is extremely lazy,poor game design.There SHOUDL be lots of conten t at al llevels,players should have the feeling of going anywhere to live out the ROLE PLAYINMG experience,it should NEVER feel liek a connect the dots game.
Instances are not game worlds,they are not realistic in terms of the genre,they really should have no place in a role playing world.They also remove the MMO factor,you can't cal la game a MMO just becuase you can login massive amounts of players,the game has to actually operate as one.This would be like sticking a Corvette decal on a Volvo and selling it as a Corvette.
The real truth is developers are on a trend to FLOOD the market with incredibly cheap games that are designed to run for pennies a day.They simply toss in terms like MMO or RPG to attract gamers.Most of these games run like browser games or single player console games,they really are very cheap products.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I think it's fine the way it is.... This game is NOT UO/2... but I'm sure you know that!
Thankfully that will not remain so with games coming out of South Korea like Archeage, Bless, Ein and Black Desert. Companies make cheap games because they know a portion of the playerbase will eat it up and they abuse labels because they know they not only can get away with it, but players love to do it as well, as can be seen above.
This is very true.
For that same "dog eat dog" playstyle from pre-Trammel I just played a toon on Siege Perilous - the "hardcore" Felucca only shard with slower skill gains.
Felucca PvP on "regular" shards was better than ever in the post split world thanks to the Factions PvP - people would "gear up" and skill up etc. in Trammel and go into Felucca and fight for their faction (or gank anyone they thought they could beat) just the same as pre-Trammel, things were just a lot more balanced and fair.
I still have fond memories of sneaking around Brittania and pick pocketing AFK players at the Bank and trying to outrun the Guards and ganking True Brits at the town portals in Felucca.
I just also had an "escape" to RP and do PvE and craft / farm and build up my guild's keep in Trammel without being harrassed.
Here's the actual statement. If anyone is expecting an MMO, they did not get that expectation from Portalarium.
Open Play Online (OPO)
In OPO players will see everyone that the server thinks they should see. This will not necessarily be all people in the area but should be people you care the most about based on what we believe is their relevance to you.
For the most part, OPO will feel like an MMO. Lots of social interaction options with friends and other players. We are trying to distinguish ourselves from traditional MMOs only in that, unlike a normal MMO players are frequently connected directly to each other instead of all data flowing through our servers. We believe this will provide numerous advantages to both players and our service, but does differ from a traditional MMO in that the upper limit of players simultaneously on one map may be restricted.
Source: https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/?p=3955 (also on the Kickstarter page)
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I don't think many game designers have really understood the significance of Trammel. They saw it as a sign that open PVP didn't work, rather than see it was one of sevreal MMOs that have shown that in an open PVP virtual world, about 20% are going to want to participate in that, and that the more there is both division and optional passage to and from the pvp/pve areas, the more successful the game is. There are a lot of similarities between Trammel/Felucca, EVE Online and Puzzle Pirates in game design.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
You know im getting fairly tired of this litmus test on games. By that i mean "i can only enjoy a game if it has features X, Y,Z and cannot possibly like a game that has features A,B,C"
I mean really? Are people these days so incapable of enjoying a game? Not just with this game, but i see people who are not interested in games that DONT have player housing, or if it does it needs to be open world player housing (which has major issues with the game world and home avalibility btw)...
Seriously? We cant possibly enjoy a game if it has instances? We cant possibly enjoy a game if it has a certain feature or lacks another:?
People wonder why they cant find a game they like...its because the one specific game that you will like will never get made. Play games for fun, stop with the 30 point checklist where one missing feature or one feature you dont like means your going to hate the game. And yes, when you walk into a game expecting to hate it, chances are your not going to enjoy it.
Secondly, who cares what this guy wants to make? Let him make the game as he sees fit and see if you like it, however i relaize most wont bother due to it failing the 30 point checklist.
Will i play it? Well if it launches and looks decent i probably will.