Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Given Features You Do Not Like in MMORPGs... How would you design it?

2

Comments

  • PepeqPepeq Member UncommonPosts: 1,977
    Originally posted by Enbysra

    This thread has NOTHING to do with LEVELS.

     

    This thread has NOTHING to do with LEVELLESS.

     

    This thread has NOTHING to do with an ALTERNATIVE PROGRESSION THROUGH GEARS.

     

    This thread DOES have to do with CLAIMS that people make all over this forum, and every other forum dealing with MMORPGs, that there is always some other way of doing something, LOTS of other ways, or they do not like this or that.

    And yet... Give not a single iota of any sort of vague idea even, in order to start building a solid concept to move such features towards.

    See now?

    Or are we really going to continue on the "level-levelless-gear progression" harping that was merely a single example

    Ask a vague question, you get a vague answer... read your title... you left it pretty open ended, so in reality, ANY response, is a valid response.

  • ArtificeVenatusArtificeVenatus Member UncommonPosts: 1,236
     
  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by Enbysra

    Here we go, maybe you can help me get the point of this thread explained, as I apparently can not.

    You nailed it as I highlighted.

    And actually, there are plenty of MMORPG features that this topic is applicable. 

    Every single feature that someone says "I do not like that" or "there are lots of ways to do that type of feature better", every last one of those statements has a feature which applies, what ever feature it was stated about.

    This was not a thread intended for debating, it was a thread for people to just drop ideas about alternative ways to various unappreciated features.

    A lot of variety is great, so long as all that variety gets dropped like bombs.

    It is this type of thread that helps create a sifting thread in order to find diamonds, or at least, that was the intention.

    Well the problem is it's usually true that there are lots of other ways to do things, and without continuing on to a debate of why those alternate ideas aren't ideal we won't really achieve anything.

    I mean I could come up with ideas of character progression that revolved around tail growth (Worm in QBasic) or purely focused on socketing a runesword with gradually more powerful gems which control your available spells, or an entirely follower-based progression where you accumulate followers who are ever-present while you fight enemies (and the stronger enemies you get the more powerful the followers you attract who then let you fight even tougher enemies.)  But without being forced to think through all of the consequences and details of these 10-cent design ideas, they're not exactly meaningful.

    There are tons of ways to design anything.  But most of them suck.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • ArtificeVenatusArtificeVenatus Member UncommonPosts: 1,236
     
  • ButeoRegalisButeoRegalis Member UncommonPosts: 594

    IMO thank WoW, or more specifically the WoW trolls for it.

    Everytime, a developer does something new and it works, that feature gets shouted down as clunky, in beta state, or just not fun.

    Two years later, Blizz adds that feature to WoW and it's the best thing ever since sliced bread, and thank god that WoW finally came up with the idea to do it, just goes to show you, every other MMO sucks, because they didn't have the idea first and now they'll all copy it from WoW!

    image

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,774
    Originally posted by waynejr2
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by CrazKanuk

    Just because something can be done multiple ways doesn't mean it always should. Destiny is a great example of how gear-based progression can fail horribly. Level-based progression offers a linear progression, while gear-based progression generally has more barriers to progression at later levels than level-based does. 

    It is about implementation and details.

    Gear progression is great in games like Diablo, PoE, and even wow, but not so much in Destiny.

    And it is silly to assume destiny not looking at different types of design. Case in point, Diablo changes the skill design (no more trees) drastically. PoE change it in another direction.

    WoW put in "farmville" into the game. Tons of examples of many things devs have tried.

     

    Apparently your fine examples don't count for some reason.   I think the OP is just trying to be clever about forcing a specific way of doing something.  AKA- no levels.

    likely devs don't listen to everything being said here. So all is good.

  • sunandshadowsunandshadow Member RarePosts: 1,985
    What about, "There are many ways a game could have all monsters be capturable as pets, but developers aren't willing to do that."  Is that the kind of statement we're talking about?  Or does it still not apply, because the real problem isn't how to do it, but why it isn't being done?
    I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story.  So PM me if you are starting one.
  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852
    Originally posted by sunandshadow
    What about, "There are many ways a game could have all monsters be capturable as pets, but developers aren't willing to do that."  Is that the kind of statement we're talking about?  Or does it still not apply, because the real problem isn't how to do it, but why it isn't being done?

    Agreed.. There are some really really good features in many games, and I"m confused why some devs ignore or refuse to apply those features..  Your pet example is one.. and I think the flex leveling like what GW2 does is another.. 

  • ArtificeVenatusArtificeVenatus Member UncommonPosts: 1,236
     
  • sunandshadowsunandshadow Member RarePosts: 1,985
    Originally posted by Enbysra
    Originally posted by sunandshadow
    What about, "There are many ways a game could have all monsters be capturable as pets, but developers aren't willing to do that."  Is that the kind of statement we're talking about?  Or does it still not apply, because the real problem isn't how to do it, but why it isn't being done?

    Yes! That is exactly the sort of thing we are looking for, as one aspect. But as I gave in the "levels-levelless-gear" example (which was about "progression" while using 3 examples of progression), there should further still be examples of different ways to put it into a game. So what ways would you see are possible in order to capture those monsters as pets?

     

    It seems some of these others really do just like to argue and-or troll, or defend who the hell knows what or why. Honestly doubt they even know. I mean, even given a laundry list that looks like Santa's "To Go To" list on Xmas eve... Even sh!t ideas initially may have quite a bit more possibilities resulting from them then the majority of people can imagine. So while the ass hats are busy knocking down every little idea they think is crap, they should take a real close look at just how dumb they themselves are for not seeing how to develop said ideas. This is of course, so long as all they do is attack ideas. It is one thing to think an idea is crap and have nothing to add, but it is something else entirely to simply knock an idea just to knock it. Perhaps they should learn why "silence is golden."

    But, it doesn't _matter_ what ways the monsters are capturable as pets, as long as its the same for all monsters in the game (or all non-humanoid, non-boss monsters).  It doesn't matter if all monsters have a 10% chance to drop an egg, or all classes can buy a classless monster-capture skill which requires you to channel at the monster for 10 seconds without hitting it or dying, or only the monster tamer class can capture and use monsters and they do it by throwing a consumable capture crystal at a monster.  It doesn't matter if all newly-captured monsters are level 1 and have identical stats, or match the monster they were captured from.  None of these are relevant to the question of why developers aren't including this as a standard element of all games that have capturable pets at all.

    Making a thread scolding trolls seems useless, since trolls by definition would never respond to a challenge to make helpful suggestions, and the scolding tone is a bit insulting to the rest of us who normally try to make useful suggestions.

    I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story.  So PM me if you are starting one.
  • vaktu.comvaktu.com Member Posts: 16
    Originally posted by sunandshadow
    Originally posted by Enbysra
    Originally posted by sunandshadow
    What about, "There are many ways a game could have all monsters be capturable as pets, but developers aren't willing to do that."  Is that the kind of statement we're talking about?  Or does it still not apply, because the real problem isn't how to do it, but why it isn't being done?

    Yes! That is exactly the sort of thing we are looking for, as one aspect. But as I gave in the "levels-levelless-gear" example (which was about "progression" while using 3 examples of progression), there should further still be examples of different ways to put it into a game. So what ways would you see are possible in order to capture those monsters as pets?

     

    It seems some of these others really do just like to argue and-or troll, or defend who the hell knows what or why. Honestly doubt they even know. I mean, even given a laundry list that looks like Santa's "To Go To" list on Xmas eve... Even sh!t ideas initially may have quite a bit more possibilities resulting from them then the majority of people can imagine. So while the ass hats are busy knocking down every little idea they think is crap, they should take a real close look at just how dumb they themselves are for not seeing how to develop said ideas. This is of course, so long as all they do is attack ideas. It is one thing to think an idea is crap and have nothing to add, but it is something else entirely to simply knock an idea just to knock it. Perhaps they should learn why "silence is golden."

    But, it doesn't _matter_ what ways the monsters are capturable as pets, as long as its the same for all monsters in the game (or all non-humanoid, non-boss monsters).  It doesn't matter if all monsters have a 10% chance to drop an egg, or all classes can buy a classless monster-capture skill which requires you to channel at the monster for 10 seconds without hitting it or dying, or only the monster tamer class can capture and use monsters and they do it by throwing a consumable capture crystal at a monster.  It doesn't matter if all newly-captured monsters are level 1 and have identical stats, or match the monster they were captured from.  None of these are relevant to the question of why developers aren't including this as a standard element of all games that have capturable pets at all.

    Making a thread scolding trolls seems useless, since trolls by definition would never respond to a challenge to make helpful suggestions, and the scolding tone is a bit insulting to the rest of us who normally try to make useful suggestions.

    Yeah, and in the Pokemon series, please remind me how it worked exactly? I think its just the way it was done in 1996, and in the remakes from 2004 on GBA - you were able to catch all the monsters, except some bosses I guess. The games were extremely popular. I'm sure there is more games that do what you said.

    The point is, people here don't understand what do you mean by writing "There are many ways to design x, but developers are not willing to". What means they're not willing to? You mean nobody does / nobody did that, or you mean its just not a mainstream? Or you just want to whine because there is some game you play, you focus on that game and you wish it had done something different? No offense, I just really don't get it. At the beginning I thought that you want to provide unique ideas that were not yet implemented, but you think they could be fun - so I pointed it out that its not unique, and some developers are willing to implement it, even in mainstream games.

    Furry Quest Online - New Independent MMORPG comming soon! See more at http://www.vaktu.com

  • HycooHycoo Member UncommonPosts: 217
    I always wondered why they made spells and abilities just a result of a level up.

    And at the same time they make boring quests.

    In my perfect mmo getting every new spell/ability would be a task. If you wanted to learn the "Jaguar Strike" with your sword, go the jungle tribe across the world that teaches it!

    This could be the same for passive "techniques" that you can slot aswell. If you wanted to be evasive while wearing cloth, seek out the monastery far up in the mountains where monks teach it.

    No levels needed. Gear can support different playstyles. Much less horizontal and generic.

    image
  • VezlinVezlin Member UncommonPosts: 31

    There are many ways to design ____weapon itemization deeper than standard statgrowth____,

    • Getting strength +1 at level 1 and strength +10 at level 100 really shouldn't be all it takes to get excited about new or different weapons.
    • Weapons, for example, could have additional special effects based on the type, such as chances to bleed with swords, or means of preparing a counter with offhand daggers. Individual weapons may have bonuses that directly affect your character's parameters instead of indirectly through attributes. Instead of +2 STR +3 DEX, you could have a +% chance to bleed, +movement rate or resource generation.
    • Furthermore, this would allow for new systems surrounding itemization. Crafters could combine materials to get exact combinations and values to a more combat oriented customer's specifics. Quests or quest like requirements could be set up to further enhance and customize weapons. FFXIV already uses the latter system in relic weapons, though what I have in mind would be less rangen and more effort based than several of its steps.
     
    am i doin it rite?
  • ArtificeVenatusArtificeVenatus Member UncommonPosts: 1,236
     
  • sunandshadowsunandshadow Member RarePosts: 1,985
    Originally posted by Enbysra
    Originally posted by Vezlin

    There are many ways to design ____weapon itemization deeper than standard statgrowth____

     
    am i doin it rite?

    Perfect.

    Ah.  So if we forget the problematic part about unwilling developers, it might be possible to create something like a book or wiki of MMO design options.  That would be a pretty cool object.

    I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story.  So PM me if you are starting one.
  • ArtificeVenatusArtificeVenatus Member UncommonPosts: 1,236
     
  • PepeqPepeq Member UncommonPosts: 1,977
    Originally posted by Enbysra

    Over and over and over, we see lots of claims that basically wear the same clothing :

     

    There are many ways to design ____insert feature here____,

    but developers are not willing to.

     

    Instead of making empty claims that deliver nothing, I figured I would begin this thread as an exercise in order to practice making constructive contributions. Here, let me begin :

     

    • A level system is not the only way to deal with character progression.
     
    • Another form of progression could be through a levelless system, such that allows individual skills to be learned and then built up through use.
     
    • Further still, another form of progression could have nothing at all to do with your character progressing, but instead having combat gear you acquire be what actually builds.
     
    Now you try...

    Your OP was completely unclear, hence the responses you got.

     

    You want JUST a list of things that aren't done right in MMOs and a simple suggestion as to how it could be done differently or right, absolutely NO DISCUSSION on whatever anyone posts... just a list and only a list.

     

    Had you put it that way, people MIGHT have understood what you wanted.

     

  • ArtificeVenatusArtificeVenatus Member UncommonPosts: 1,236
     
  • laokokolaokoko Member UncommonPosts: 2,004

    It is always a money issue.

    If you are so sure of a certain design, you should sell your house and invest in it.  I certainly wouldn't.

     

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441

    The devs are very well aware that you can do things a lot different ways.

    However is it really the investors that makes the call and making something that already have been done and works is cheaper (less testing) and safer. You might make another Wow ripp off but you will get your money and back and some.

    A totally new game with it's own mechanics could be the next thing but it could also fail miserably and you would loose all the money you put in it. Most investors rather play safe.

    "Mediocrity rules" or something.

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Originally posted by laokoko

    It is always a money issue.

    If you are so sure of a certain design, you should sell your house and invest in it.  I certainly wouldn't.

    You can never be sure of anything but death and taxes. And even with great features can you still botch things up (*cough* Vanguard *cough*).

    But the thing is that someone needs to try new things out or the MMO genre will stomp in the same place forever and slowly bleed players.

    The real problem is that ideas just ain't enough, you need someone who is really competent implementing them as well. And there sadly aren't that much people around with the skill to do just that.

    But of course with the right idea and competent devs you will hit gold. I actually met Notch before he started on Minecraft and he seemed like just any of us, now hes insanely rich because he tried something different and implemented it the right way.

    That doesn't mean there aren't a 100 SIGIL for every Mojäng but the potential is out there.

  • FlintsteenFlintsteen Member UncommonPosts: 282

    Exactly !!    It works well in ex. TF2,  so I don't see a reason why it couldn't work for an MMO.  What argument are you trying to make ? The argument that someone else already have a certain feature,  and therefore it would never be a success in a new MMO ?  

     

    All MMO's do are copying the best features from previous games and try to make a mix that fits their game.  Theese day it's extremely rare to find a feature that haven't been tried before. WoW is the biggest player on the MMO market and they have done nothing but copying from previous mmo's and just add polish.

     

    Copy all things good that you think works for your game,  scrap all the things that doesn't work for your game, just don't make bad copies.  That is what WoW have done well in the past.   They make a copy,  yes,  but most times the copy WoW made is better than the original.

     

     

  • FlintsteenFlintsteen Member UncommonPosts: 282
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Enbysra

     
    • Further still, another form of progression could have nothing at all to do with your character progressing, but instead having combat gear you acquire be what actually builds.
     
     

    Which is done in all online shooters already

    (previous post was supposed to be a reply to this)

  • ArtificeVenatusArtificeVenatus Member UncommonPosts: 1,236
     
  • ArtificeVenatusArtificeVenatus Member UncommonPosts: 1,236
     
Sign In or Register to comment.