I agree with the prey /predator feature altho there's a video with Richard Garriot talking about this very subject in this section, that does not make you hopeful I would avoid the mixing species thing like Zealand tho
I agree with the prey /predator feature altho there's a video with Richard Garriot talking about this very subject in this section, that does not make you hopeful I would avoid the mixing species thing like Zealand tho
Actually would assume players would hunt like crazy. That in areas where players live there would be little to no wildlife. Just domesticated animals.
To me sandboxes should be large enough players can't hunt things to absolute extinction. But if they do hunt you just introduce new random species.
A big problem was in UO fighting system and animals AI, if you don't make too easy to kill them (like it should be, try to run toward a deer in real life and see if he stays still) should get harder for players to fuck up the entire system
Well OP like so many you miss a very simple point. If a design "a deep mmo+rpg" is not your idea nor caters to a larger majority,that is no reason at all to change what it should stand for. YES the deep and complex design SHOULD be discussed if yo uare trying to turn it into a SIMPLE form of millions playing to simply get easy levels and play around at end game because that is WOW and we already have that game.To be honest,MANY players i came in contact with are not really ENJOYING the game of WOW but are varied type of completionists,speed levelers,their friends or family are playing etc etc ,MANY reasons OTHER than just FUN.
Another very important opinion oft discussed over the years is one that really irks me>>>>TOO SLOW.That in NO WAY what so ever is the reason for a game being boring,the game IS BORING if you need to find an excuse as simple as saying it is too slow.
People go to the movies,MANY people enjoy a slow well acted/Drama type movie and don't care for the ACTION movies.NOBODY is right ore wrong here,it is simply a fact of you want a DRAMA movie,go find that movie,you want an ACTION game,go find it but in NOW WAY what so ever is a RPG suppose to cater to ANY type of SPEED. The correct way to discuss that aspect of a game be it rpg or any type game would be to say that being too slow makes a boring game even more boring but the fact remains it is boring and no super fast speed is going to change that.
TOO many people over the years have been trying to make a mmorpg LESS of a MMO and LESS of a rpg and i don't like ANY opinion or notion on that matter,i don't want Diablo for my mmorpg,i want a good deep game that mimics a real world and how we would reside within that world.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
A big problem was in UO fighting system and animals AI, if you don't make too easy to kill them (like it should be, try to run toward a deer in real life and see if he stays still) should get harder for players to fuck up the entire system
Yes and no. As someone who lives where deer over populate and biggest predator is motorvehicle, no. I get close to deer almost everyday. Closer than I am comfortable sometimes. If I had a fireball or use a bow I could kill them easy enough. Maybe it would be different if they were actively hunted.
If you as a developer want to create a true sandbox, you can NOT allow PvP to take over your game, yet you can NOT ignore PvP either.
I don't see why a sandbox developer can't ignore pvp. They'd simply be making a PvE focused sandbox game. Sandbox(true or otherwise) never meant "full freedom" to do whatever the player wanted. Point me to a few "true" sandbox games and i can list a dozen things that i don't have the full freedom to do.
PvP would just be one of those things added to the list in a PvE focused sandbox game. Just like there's PvE themeparks and PvP themeparks, so too can there be PvE sandboxes and PvP sandboxes.
If you as a developer want to create a true sandbox, you can NOT allow PvP to take over your game, yet you can NOT ignore PvP either.
I don't see why a sandbox developer can't ignore pvp. They'd simply be making a PvE focused sandbox game. Sandbox(true or otherwise) never meant "full freedom" to do whatever the player wanted. Point me to a few "true" sandbox games and i can list a dozen things that i don't have the full freedom to do.
PvP would just be one of those things added to the list in a PvE focused sandbox game. Just like there's PvE themeparks and PvP themeparks, so too can there be PvE sandboxes and PvP sandboxes.
They could but most sandbox games created are about PvP except SWG which was opt in. With the younger generation growing up on survival games sandboxes there is likely never going to be. They are way more grief tolerant than the typical MMORPG players and they will likely be the targeted audience.
If you as a developer want to create a true sandbox, you can NOT allow PvP to take over your game, yet you can NOT ignore PvP either.
I don't see why a sandbox developer can't ignore pvp. They'd simply be making a PvE focused sandbox game. Sandbox(true or otherwise) never meant "full freedom" to do whatever the player wanted. Point me to a few "true" sandbox games and i can list a dozen things that i don't have the full freedom to do.
PvP would just be one of those things added to the list in a PvE focused sandbox game. Just like there's PvE themeparks and PvP themeparks, so too can there be PvE sandboxes and PvP sandboxes.
They could but most sandbox games created are about PvP except SWG which was opt in. With the younger generation growing up on survival games sandboxes there is likely never going to be. They are way more grief tolerant than the typical MMORPG players and they will likely be the targeted audience.
Hmm i'm not too sure if sandbox players are simply more grief tolerant or if it's the case that a primarily pve focused sandbox mmorpg hasn't been made yet for people to really gauge interest levels. It could be a pve sandbox strips any records a pvp sandbox game has made in the past like it was nothing. Similar to how WoW mixed with the at the time normal mmorpg formula with their own twist on things and it outstripped every other mmorpg at the time.
I'll be honest though i don't really know or follow that many sandbox mmorpgs at all so if there has been pve ones that i just am not aware of then ignore what i said.
After this thread and a several other discussions, I think i've come up with my final idea:
PvPvE sounds good, but would need an increadible amount of work and test. I've always wanted to give priority to "spontaneus" small scale random PvP (cavaran / bandits / headhunting and stuff like that) but I've come to realize that it creates a lot of design issue.
So I'll take back the approach I briefly designed in the previous pages and alter it a bit.
In the game there is a finite number (2,3,4) of factions, players must choose one during the creation. You cannot (unless in specific modes, like arenas or tavern brawl) attack players of your own faction or NPC. Each faction has a starting area which is totally safe and is used mostly for player hub/tutorial/ early development (again, I don't like the idea of people spawning naked and figure out how to make iron swords in few hours). Around this starting area (I'm thinking mostly about an archipelago setting) there are countless islands (not all unlocked from the beginning). Your NPC faction leads the expansion on these various islands, that are very wild and with NPC enemies, both beast and humanoids) along with the players. In these islands, you work with your friends and allied NPC to conquer the area, clear the enemies, expand your faction influence. In return, each faction allow their player to claim land, build things and indulge in sanbox aspects of the game. It's a mix of spanish conquistadores + settlers + feudalism. An improved "dynamic event" system and good NPC AI delivers enough content and challenge for players in these areas, and since the threat are NPC only you can fine tune the experience. All of this is without random open PvP cause people from other factions can't get to you. If and when you want to do larger scale PvP (and it would be meaningful for everybody) you go in a third big area where the various NPC factions are battling on a larger scale, still following your faction guidelines.
After this thread and a several other discussions, I think i've come up with my final idea:
PvPvE sounds good, but would need an increadible amount of work and test. I've always wanted to give priority to "spontaneus" small scale random PvP (cavaran / bandits / headhunting and stuff like that) but I've come to realize that it creates a lot of design issue.
So I'll take back the approach I briefly designed in the previous pages and alter it a bit.
In the game there is a finite number (2,3,4) of factions, players must choose one during the creation. You cannot (unless in specific modes, like arenas or tavern brawl) attack players of your own faction or NPC. Each faction has a starting area which is totally safe and is used mostly for player hub/tutorial/ early development (again, I don't like the idea of people spawning naked and figure out how to make iron swords in few hours). Around this starting area (I'm thinking mostly about an archipelago setting) there are countless islands (not all unlocked from the beginning). Your NPC faction leads the expansion on these various islands, that are very wild and with NPC enemies, both beast and humanoids) along with the players. In these islands, you work with your friends and allied NPC to conquer the area, clear the enemies, expand your faction influence. In return, each faction allow their player to claim land, build things and indulge in sanbox aspects of the game. It's a mix of spanish conquistadores + settlers + feudalism. An improved "dynamic event" system and good NPC AI delivers enough content and challenge for players in these areas, and since the threat are NPC only you can fine tune the experience. All of this is without random open PvP cause people from other factions can't get to you. If and when you want to do larger scale PvP (and it would be meaningful for everybody) you go in a third big area where the various NPC factions are battling on a larger scale, still following your faction guidelines.
Well I always had the idea of player factions being your clan like Naruto.
You shared 3/4ths of your abilities with your clan. If you get kicked you would only have your few personal abilities making you weak.
Your actions spoke for the clan so killing someone was a declaration of war unless your clan autokicked killers or were at war. This includes your vessel/liege clans. NPC clans would kick you out if you weren't at war with the person you killed. If kicked your declaration of war amd murder follows you allowing that offended clan to kill you or any clan you join until a truce is made.
Enemies could be imprisoned on defeat. All clans required a clan hall which could be destroyed. Making all clans at least approach some accountability.
After this thread and a several other discussions, I think i've come up with my final idea:
PvPvE sounds good, but would need an increadible amount of work and test. I've always wanted to give priority to "spontaneus" small scale random PvP (cavaran / bandits / headhunting and stuff like that) but I've come to realize that it creates a lot of design issue.
So I'll take back the approach I briefly designed in the previous pages and alter it a bit.
In the game there is a finite number (2,3,4) of factions, players must choose one during the creation. You cannot (unless in specific modes, like arenas or tavern brawl) attack players of your own faction or NPC. Each faction has a starting area which is totally safe and is used mostly for player hub/tutorial/ early development (again, I don't like the idea of people spawning naked and figure out how to make iron swords in few hours). Around this starting area (I'm thinking mostly about an archipelago setting) there are countless islands (not all unlocked from the beginning). Your NPC faction leads the expansion on these various islands, that are very wild and with NPC enemies, both beast and humanoids) along with the players. In these islands, you work with your friends and allied NPC to conquer the area, clear the enemies, expand your faction influence. In return, each faction allow their player to claim land, build things and indulge in sanbox aspects of the game. It's a mix of spanish conquistadores + settlers + feudalism. An improved "dynamic event" system and good NPC AI delivers enough content and challenge for players in these areas, and since the threat are NPC only you can fine tune the experience. All of this is without random open PvP cause people from other factions can't get to you. If and when you want to do larger scale PvP (and it would be meaningful for everybody) you go in a third big area where the various NPC factions are battling on a larger scale, still following your faction guidelines.
Well I always had the idea of player factions being your clan like Naruto.
You shared 3/4ths of your abilities with your clan. If you get kicked you would only have your few personal abilities making you weak.
Your actions spoke for the clan so killing someone was a declaration of war unless your clan autokicked killers or were at war. This includes your vessel/liege clans. NPC clans would kick you out if you weren't at war with the person you killed. If kicked your declaration of war amd murder follows you allowing that offended clan to kill you or any clan you join until a truce is made.
Enemies could be imprisoned on defeat. All clans required a clan hall which could be destroyed. Making all clans at least approach some accountability.
the idea of skills tied to your clan is very original!
Other than that, you're talking about something with a lot of territory control, conquering and a much more spontaneous PvP: which is not totally bad, but I'm going on a different path. Loosing you guild hall could be possible in my scenario, but if you allow something like that to happen by the hand of another guild (that could be much bigger than yours) would be too hardcore and we go back to the effort / chances to loose discussion. Like with the equip discussion (nobody wants to loose their hypersword on which spent a lot of time to get) I'd allow people to place their guild hall / shops/ houses in the area where there's no pvp. You could still loose them against NPC, but as a developer / game master it would be easier to tune the level of challenge. In open PvP areas I'd encourage territory, building, destroying, sieges etc BUT only with structures that are relatively easy to rebuild and hold no sentimental value (palisades, war camp, towers etc). You could add a layer of "outlaws" to my scenario, you're born inside a faction but you reject it later, but I think it would bring some issues. Will explain them if required
The most important thing about death and revival mechanics, to me, is to have some kind of lore explanation about why players are immortal. In a setting where players aren't supposed to be nonhuman I'd be fine with being KOed instead of dead - laying on the ground in a faint until revived or a timer is up. NPCs dying tragically might work better as story if players didn't regularly get better from the same thing.
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.
If you don't make avatar death meaningful, be it through penalties, set piece drama (like the Cleric mentioned) etc, you just add to the feeling you are playing a game not living a game. MMOs are meant to draw you in, not go PING! and pop you are alive again.
The most important thing about death and revival mechanics, to me, is to have some kind of lore explanation about why players are immortal. In a setting where players aren't supposed to be nonhuman I'd be fine with being KOed instead of dead - laying on the ground in a faint until revived or a timer is up. NPCs dying tragically might work better as story if players didn't regularly get better from the same thing.
Thats not all the mechainics that go with it , and should be updated ..
In UO also , for ex..
If you are killed by a Troll .... , you may very well see the message as you enter ghost form ..
" A Troll rummages thru your corpse and takes a leather satchel"
You can also see the Troll doing this ..as you stand there Boooooo
Now you must get rezzed rush back loot your corpse and find the Troll becasue he has something that belongs to you , Also keep in mind that any player could kill said Troll in that time frame and get your bag ...
Its a great mechanic and one of the best player death mechanics in any game IMO and boggles my mind its not been adopted by other games , We loot mobs all day why shouldnt they be able to loot us , at least the more intelligent ones ...
But , its just more of the same kid gloves that devs use on the delicate communities of todays MMos like Gw2 , ESO, FF14 etc .. could you imagine the tears if a mob looted one of these delicate flowers in one of these games . And there was an actual penalty for Death not this silly soft ass shit where you throw yourself at walls of swords all day and just jump up with a smile ...... My God the outcry on the forums would be heard for years ..
Thanks for the input, guys: are clerics also present in "wild and savage" areas?
The healers in UO ?........................yes wanderers ....yes scattered everywhere,
They also added now Ankh system at each Dungeon entrance .. which rezzes
One of my houses is located on Avatar Isle just NE of the Daemon Temple , full of Daemons, Dragons, Wyverns and Greater Dragones , and funny enough at times you will see a Wandering Healer strolling thru the middle of it like he was headed to picnic:)
Comments
I would avoid the mixing species thing like Zealand tho
To me sandboxes should be large enough players can't hunt things to absolute extinction. But if they do hunt you just introduce new random species.
If a design "a deep mmo+rpg" is not your idea nor caters to a larger majority,that is no reason at all to change what it should stand for.
YES the deep and complex design SHOULD be discussed if yo uare trying to turn it into a SIMPLE form of millions playing to simply get easy levels and play around at end game because that is WOW and we already have that game.To be honest,MANY players i came in contact with are not really ENJOYING the game of WOW but are varied type of completionists,speed levelers,their friends or family are playing etc etc ,MANY reasons OTHER than just FUN.
Another very important opinion oft discussed over the years is one that really irks me>>>>TOO SLOW.That in NO WAY what so ever is the reason for a game being boring,the game IS BORING if you need to find an excuse as simple as saying it is too slow.
People go to the movies,MANY people enjoy a slow well acted/Drama type movie and don't care for the ACTION movies.NOBODY is right ore wrong here,it is simply a fact of you want a DRAMA movie,go find that movie,you want an ACTION game,go find it but in NOW WAY what so ever is a RPG suppose to cater to ANY type of SPEED.
The correct way to discuss that aspect of a game be it rpg or any type game would be to say that being too slow makes a boring game even more boring but the fact remains it is boring and no super fast speed is going to change that.
TOO many people over the years have been trying to make a mmorpg LESS of a MMO and LESS of a rpg and i don't like ANY opinion or notion on that matter,i don't want Diablo for my mmorpg,i want a good deep game that mimics a real world and how we would reside within that world.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
There are cars, there are motorbikes... What if I like quads? Fuck me ?
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
PvPvE sounds good, but would need an increadible amount of work and test.
I've always wanted to give priority to "spontaneus" small scale random PvP (cavaran / bandits / headhunting and stuff like that) but I've come to realize that it creates a lot of design issue.
So I'll take back the approach I briefly designed in the previous pages and alter it a bit.
In the game there is a finite number (2,3,4) of factions, players must choose one during the creation. You cannot (unless in specific modes, like arenas or tavern brawl) attack players of your own faction or NPC.
Each faction has a starting area which is totally safe and is used mostly for player hub/tutorial/ early development (again, I don't like the idea of people spawning naked and figure out how to make iron swords in few hours). Around this starting area (I'm thinking mostly about an archipelago setting) there are countless islands (not all unlocked from the beginning). Your NPC faction leads the expansion on these various islands, that are very wild and with NPC enemies, both beast and humanoids) along with the players. In these islands, you work with your friends and allied NPC to conquer the area, clear the enemies, expand your faction influence. In return, each faction allow their player to claim land, build things and indulge in sanbox aspects of the game. It's a mix of spanish conquistadores + settlers + feudalism.
An improved "dynamic event" system and good NPC AI delivers enough content and challenge for players in these areas, and since the threat are NPC only you can fine tune the experience.
All of this is without random open PvP cause people from other factions can't get to you. If and when you want to do larger scale PvP (and it would be meaningful for everybody) you go in a third big area where the various NPC factions are battling on a larger scale, still following your faction guidelines.
You shared 3/4ths of your abilities with your clan. If you get kicked you would only have your few personal abilities making you weak.
Your actions spoke for the clan so killing someone was a declaration of war unless your clan autokicked killers or were at war. This includes your vessel/liege clans. NPC clans would kick you out if you weren't at war with the person you killed. If kicked your declaration of war amd murder follows you allowing that offended clan to kill you or any clan you join until a truce is made.
Enemies could be imprisoned on defeat. All clans required a clan hall which could be destroyed. Making all clans at least approach some accountability.
Other than that, you're talking about something with a lot of territory control, conquering and a much more spontaneous PvP: which is not totally bad, but I'm going on a different path. Loosing you guild hall could be possible in my scenario, but if you allow something like that to happen by the hand of another guild (that could be much bigger than yours) would be too hardcore and we go back to the effort / chances to loose discussion.
Like with the equip discussion (nobody wants to loose their hypersword on which spent a lot of time to get) I'd allow people to place their guild hall / shops/ houses in the area where there's no pvp. You could still loose them against NPC, but as a developer / game master it would be easier to tune the level of challenge. In open PvP areas I'd encourage territory, building, destroying, sieges etc BUT only with structures that are relatively easy to rebuild and hold no sentimental value (palisades, war camp, towers etc).
You could add a layer of "outlaws" to my scenario, you're born inside a faction but you reject it later, but I think it would bring some issues. Will explain them if required