1. Vertical progression of leveling but also horizontal progression of collecting
2. Levels
3. Both - sandpark
4. No death penalty
5. optional grouping/solo play.
6. Player housing
7. no PvP.
8. no looting (can't really have looting without PvP)
9. medium difficulty?
10. Questing plus hunting mobs for crafting materials
11. crafting making best gear.
12. Neither - directly earning stat points through relevant activities, buying skills with points earned by leveling
13. SANDPARK
14. End game (of sim/crafting activities, not raids/dungeons)
15. cosmetic or no cash shop.
16. F2P or P2P
Post edited by sunandshadow on
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.
> 1. Horizontal progression/shallow progression vs. vast vertical progression.
Slow progression for a MMO that you are supposed to be able to play and enjoy for decades.
Ideally, at game release, you should see like 2/3 of the available game content on a character, assuming you dont intentionally stall and play content below your level in order to see it all. This way you can spice up leveling up new characters.
After that alternative content should be added at all levels so leveling new characters keeps being fun to old players.
> 2. Levels vs. no levels/no power platform levels.
Levels and hard balance of levels, meaning characters of same level are indeed compareable in their power, in order to be able to provide a constant challenge during any point of the gameplay.
> 3. Simulation vs. game first.
Game. Immersion comes from great, challenging game mechanics, not from doing stupid things for "realism".
> 4. No death penalty or harsh death penalty.
Neither. Good death penalty means you get to feel you died, but it shouldnt be so harsh as to make the player avoiding taking risks at all.
> 5. Forced grouping vs. optional grouping/solo play.
Neither. Grouping necessary for boss fights and dungeons, but you can explore the world solo at your own leisure and you can attempt dungeons on your own if they are below your level or if you are so good at playing and have so good gear.
> 6. Player housing or no player housing.
If a MMO doesnt already offer housing at release, add it as soon as possible.
> 7. Open World PvP vs. restricted PvP or no PvP.
Definitely not unregulated PvP.
People should be able to avoid PvP altogether if they dont like it.
There will be special PvP events in which everyone can participate, even those who have disabled it.
I also like the idea of having wars between guilds for priviledged resources, such as a castle.
> 8. Full loot vs. limited or no looting.
Definitely not full loot.
Full loot means you cannot have a game in which equipment is valueable. I want a game in which you work on your gear longterm, as another scale of progression, thus full loot aint no option ever.
> 9. Hard difficulty vs. easy difficulty.
Thats not a real question. Any game needs to offer a challenge or its boring. The exception is games with strong story, but thats not really an option for a MMO.
> 10. Questing vs. MOB grinding.
You need to provide as much story content for a MMO as possible, but unless you are super successful as WoW, you wont be able to provide the player with stories 100% of time.
And WoW of course was milked for profit, mostly, so they didnt do that either.
> 11. PvE having best drops vs. crafting making best gear.
A mix of course. Who wants the best gear must do both.
> 12. Questing/kill based advancement vs. usage base advancement.
???
> 13. themepark vs. sandbox.
Good mix of both.
> 14. End game vs. no end game.
Theres always an end game. Its a MMO.
> 15. Cash shops vs. cosmetic or no cash shop.
No cash shop. Cosmetic cash shop means you hate your players and believe they're stupid, or at least some of them.
Well to me this sounds like a question of which design is better: Vanilla/TBC Wow or Modern wow and the correct answer is ofc Vanilla/TBC. Modern gaming philosophy is too lazy for mmorpgs
I stand Firmly on the flat rate a month no cash shop at all ground. We had nice communities back then.
Now its free to play they say, and turns into pay to win big time. These tend to be riddled with the most cussing and fussing, and selling drugs since its the lower class of people playing.
1. Horizontal progression/shallow progression vs. vast vertical progression.
Diagonal. You can choose whether to get stronger vertically or unlock new skills horizontally each time you gain a level, so you can either be a tower of strength or a warehouse of versatility, and everything in between. Obviously this would only work in a rock paper scissors combat system.
2. Levels vs. no levels/no power platform levels.
Levels. They're the simplest way to represent progression and I don't think there's anything wrong with them.
3. Simulation vs. game first.
Simulation. I have exponentially more fun in a game when I'm immersed in it.
4. No death penalty or harsh death penalty.
Corpse runs to retrieve gear/loot, and possibly a death counter that permakills your character after accumulating a certain number of kills.
5. Forced grouping vs. optional grouping/solo play.
Strongly encouraged grouping. You can try to solo, but you won't get far unless you're playing a stealth class (which also makes RP sense to be for soloers).
6. Player housing or no player housing.
Player housing all the way. Preferably open world, and serving functions other than just somewhere to hold online parties, such as farming the surrounding lands, operating a (NPC staffed) shop, maintaining a private crafting workshop, etc.
7. Open World PvP vs. restricted PvP or no PvP.
No PvP outside designated arenas, unless the game is built around faction warfare, or it's necessary for the game's setting (e.g. a Wild West game would feel weird without outlaws, an age of sail game would feel weird without pirates, etc), but even then choosing to PvP should not be a decision to be taken lightly - perhaps you enable permadeath when you become an outlaw.
8. Full loot vs. limited or no looting.
No loot unless outlaws/bandits are in the game. Otherwise the PvP should be focused on larger aims, such as capturing enemy cities, rather than looting the enemy. If the game doesn't have PvP, there's even less of a reason to have looting, because it discourages players from helping others when they get in trouble and encourages luring without any real upside.
9. Hard difficulty vs. easy difficulty.
Hard. Even attacking a lone goblin scout should have the possibility of you getting curbstomped by his friends hiding in the bushes for an ambush. This ties into encouraging grouping/stealthing.
10. Questing vs. MOB grinding.
Neither. MMO quests as they currently exist are awful, and the only thing that's worse is sitting in the same clearing for hours killing the same five wolves as they respawn. Mobs shouldn't be waiting around for you to kill them, they should be wandering through the open world or living in their own dens/dungeons/encampments/etc that spawn in different locations every time they are destroyed - think Skyrim for example. XP for combat classes (and yes there should be non combat classes) should come from killing these mobs or (for bonus XP) clearing out their home bases.
11. PvE having best drops vs. crafting making best gear.
Crafted gear should be the best, but crafters should get their recipes from reverse engineering looted gear. For example, you might find a rather weak rusted dagger that has a poweful runic inscription - a crafter can reverse engineer it to apply that inscription to a brand new mithril greatsword.
12. Questing/kill based advancement vs. usage base advancement.
Pretty much already answered this in 10.
13. themepark vs. sandbox.
Sandpark. 70% sandbox, 30% themepark.
14. End game vs. no end game.
No traditional end game. Gear treadmills are boring as hell, but endgame activities like faction warfare or player owned city management have the potential to really take advantage of the MM in MMORPG.
15. Cash shops vs. cosmetic or no cash shop.
No cash shop of any kind. Everything in the game must be earned in game, including cosmetics.
16. F2P vs. B2P vs. P2P.
P2P. I'll happily pay $30/month if it means no cash shop.
1. Horizontal progression/shallow progression vs. vast vertical progression.
Diagonal. You can choose whether to get stronger vertically or unlock new skills horizontally each time you gain a level, so you can either be a tower of strength or a warehouse of versatility, and everything in between. Obviously this would only work in a rock paper scissors combat system.
2. Levels vs. no levels/no power platform levels.
Levels. They're the simplest way to represent progression and I don't think there's anything wrong with them.
3. Simulation vs. game first.
Simulation. I have exponentially more fun in a game when I'm immersed in it.
4. No death penalty or harsh death penalty.
Corpse runs to retrieve gear/loot, and possibly a death counter that permakills your character after accumulating a certain number of kills.
5. Forced grouping vs. optional grouping/solo play.
Strongly encouraged grouping. You can try to solo, but you won't get far unless you're playing a stealth class (which also makes RP sense to be for soloers).
6. Player housing or no player housing.
Player housing all the way. Preferably open world, and serving functions other than just somewhere to hold online parties, such as farming the surrounding lands, operating a (NPC staffed) shop, maintaining a private crafting workshop, etc.
7. Open World PvP vs. restricted PvP or no PvP.
No PvP outside designated arenas, unless the game is built around faction warfare, or it's necessary for the game's setting (e.g. a Wild West game would feel weird without outlaws, an age of sail game would feel weird without pirates, etc), but even then choosing to PvP should not be a decision to be taken lightly - perhaps you enable permadeath when you become an outlaw.
8. Full loot vs. limited or no looting.
No loot unless outlaws/bandits are in the game. Otherwise the PvP should be focused on larger aims, such as capturing enemy cities, rather than looting the enemy. If the game doesn't have PvP, there's even less of a reason to have looting, because it discourages players from helping others when they get in trouble and encourages luring without any real upside.
9. Hard difficulty vs. easy difficulty.
Hard. Even attacking a lone goblin scout should have the possibility of you getting curbstomped by his friends hiding in the bushes for an ambush. This ties into encouraging grouping/stealthing.
10. Questing vs. MOB grinding.
Neither. MMO quests as they currently exist are awful, and the only thing that's worse is sitting in the same clearing for hours killing the same five wolves as they respawn. Mobs shouldn't be waiting around for you to kill them, they should be wandering through the open world or living in their own dens/dungeons/encampments/etc that spawn in different locations every time they are destroyed - think Skyrim for example. XP for combat classes (and yes there should be non combat classes) should come from killing these mobs or (for bonus XP) clearing out their home bases.
11. PvE having best drops vs. crafting making best gear.
Crafted gear should be the best, but crafters should get their recipes from reverse engineering looted gear. For example, you might find a rather weak rusted dagger that has a poweful runic inscription - a crafter can reverse engineer it to apply that inscription to a brand new mithril greatsword.
12. Questing/kill based advancement vs. usage base advancement.
Pretty much already answered this in 10.
13. themepark vs. sandbox.
Sandpark. 70% sandbox, 30% themepark.
14. End game vs. no end game.
No traditional end game. Gear treadmills are boring as hell, but endgame activities like faction warfare or player owned city management have the potential to really take advantage of the MM in MMORPG.
15. Cash shops vs. cosmetic or no cash shop.
No cash shop of any kind. Everything in the game must be earned in game, including cosmetics.
16. F2P vs. B2P vs. P2P.
P2P. I'll happily pay $30/month if it means no cash shop.
1. Horizontal progression/shallow progression vs. vast vertical progression.
2. Levels vs. no levels/no power platform levels.
3. Simulation vs. game first.
4. No death penalty or harsh death penalty.
5. Forced grouping vs. optional grouping/solo play.
6. Player housing or no player housing.
7. Open World PvP vs. restricted PvP or no PvP.
8. Full loot vs. limited or no looting. (since no PvP, I ignore this)
9. Hard difficulty vs. easy difficulty.
10. Questing vs. MOB grinding.
11. PvE having best drops vs. crafting making best gear.
12. Questing/kill based advancement vs. usage base advancement.
13. themepark vs. sandbox.
14. End game vs. no end game.
15. Cash shops vs. cosmetic or no cash shop.
16. F2P vs. B2P vs. P2P.
(I bolded the things I felt more strongly about.)
* In my mind, character levels are the same thing as skill points. Some people like to distinguish between them, but they're both forms of numerical power. MMORPGs will probably always have some form of power representation, be it for a character we're roleplaying, or as a summary of our accomplishments, so that other players can quickly assess us.
* I don't know exactly why, but I've always preferred simulation-ish games. I think it's because they're usually less linear, allowing me to make my own story more frequently. The other games feel more like railroads; like reading a story.
* On a similar line of thinking, I also prefer sandboxes. Somehow simulations and sandboxes go together, and it feels more breathtaking for me.
* No reason questing and mob grinding can't happen together--because, as I see it, it's quest hub grinding now
* No reason PVE drops and crafting gear can't be complimentary, so that the best items need both. I don't like systems existing isolated from the other.
* No reason you can't get experience for quests/killing AND gain skills when used.
* I normally like FFA PvP in open worlds, but here I'm strictly PvE focused
* Unsure how I feel about cash shops. I think the real reason they exist is because F2P became trendy. They may have existed otherwise, but I think F2P encourages them to exist, and designers are trying to be creative.
* I think some death penalty and item/power decay is good. And I think difficulty should be higher, especially early on. And when I use the word difficulty, I mean I should be dying. I should feel like there's some struggle going on. I get the impression too many MMORPGs are afraid to pressure a new player. Maybe it's because too many players quit too soon when they die a couple times.
Where I'm most uncertain is regarding the type of progression (horizontal or vertical or other), and whether there's an end game, whereby it's distinctly different from the rest of the game, and it's in a special category--raids (or end game) can be thought of as the apex of character accomplishment, since they're a culmination of the collective population.
If I think about it, server wipes (for pvp servers) and mudflation and power creep, all are interrelated. Maybe when it becomes a regular thing for ALL players in PvE-only MMORPGs to permanently die, in some fashion, mudflation and power creep won'[t be as extensive as they're now. The reason levels--and powers--keep adding up is because players are never losing them. Things pile on one another because there's no decay or limitation. And maybe horizontal progression is linked to this too, since it's attempting to NOT add onto the vertical pile.
I swear people just enjoy being contrary just to make statements.
I recall this was your post and you raising this issue.
I never raised an issue. You had an issue. I am just asking opinions on what people like in MMORPG and you got triggered over semantics. You know exactly what I am talking about but decided to make it a triggering issue for you out of context.
You asked for our opinions on a list of issues, one of which included as a possible choice the term "forced grouping." Which as you now know is a term I find to be nonsense.
I want to share a thought. Maybe these quest hub MMORPGs we got now are forced content? The old Everquest may have been forced grouping.
I never realized until a few days ago that's what they're. Forced content. When I look at my gameplay that's exactly what's going on. I'm going from quest to quest. I don't feel like it's my own narrative. I'm dragged along by the writers, as are all the other players. At least in EQ1 I felt like I followed my calling more, maybe it's because I rarely did any of the quests--and they were disjointed and hard to follow along to be honest. I'm not asserting I altogether don't enjoy the modern quest hub gameplay, rather I'm tryign to convey it's a different style of gameplay, as opposed to a linear improvement. Linear improvements are like when you add more polygons to a model, resulting in it having a more appealing appearance. Most people can agree that's an improvement. When it pertains to gameplay, disagreement is much more prevalent.
So why forced content? Because it prevents lulls. It prevents the player from getting lost. It creates their narrative. It sets their priorities. It leads them on and gives them a purpose. It allows the designer to stage an elaborate performance. It's about control, enabling the makers to WOW their audience. This is why the characters Neo or Gandalf are so memorable, and yet the random characters we've all made in many different RPGs are frequently forgotten.
* In my mind, character levels are the same thing as skill points. Some people like to distinguish between them, but they're both forms of numerical power. MMORPGs will probably always have some form of power representation, be it for a character we're roleplaying, or as a summary of our accomplishments, so that other players can quickly assess us.
Err ... yes sure its all "numbers".
But levels is a very special number that is supposed to specify the power level of your character.
While the other numbers like attributes and skills are supposed to describe your character, not specify the powerlevel of the character.
In fact depending upon your rulesystem you can consider all other choices of your character as numbers, too. Gender obviously is an enumeration of just two choices: female and male. So thats maybe simply a boolean is_male, with 0=female and 1=male. Your MMO likely has races, so thats also an enumeration, such as 0=human, 1=elf, 2=dwarf, etc. And maybe its classbased, then thats again some enumeration like 0=fighter, 1=wizard, 2=priest, 3=trickster, etc.
Everything is numbers for a computer. Characters are just numbers. Images are just numbers. Sound is just numbers. Machine code is just numbers. Doesnt mean that numbers dont have a different meaning, depending upon what they're supposed to represent.
Considering your other choices, I'm surprised you even find levels interesting at all. You sound very much like the type of gamer who doesnt want any levels or classes in a game.
1. Horizontal progression/shallow progression vs. vast vertical progression.
I prefer a mix of both.
2. Levels vs. no levels/no power platform levels.
I love leveling. It doesn't matter if it is skill points, level on a character, ect.... When I run out of levels or seeing that number go up I get bored. I do not enjoy running the same content over an over to inflate say a weapon or gearscore though.
3. Simulation vs. game first.
Game First
4. No death penalty or harsh death penalty.
Don't mind a death penalty as long as there is a way to recoup some of the lost things. Do not like death penalties where you lose everything.
5. Forced grouping vs. optional grouping/solo play.
The easiest thing for me to answer, optional grouping. I have found that as I have gotten older my tolerance for others in groups has gone down a lot. I do not like elitest or people that think you have to do things their way or you are not playing right. I also don't like content like story being locked behind group content when 90% of it is solo play.
6. Player housing or no player housing.
Prefer instanced housing. I do not like running around in a game an seeing all the homes that basically are abandoned all over the place as games age.
7. Open World PvP vs. restricted PvP or no PvP.
Restricted PvP, let those that want it have it with a toggle option and those that don't be able to just play the game.
8. Full loot vs. limited or no looting.
No looting period. The first game I ever played in the MMO setting was Ultima Online, the idea of losing all your gear for me was the worst part of the game. Sure it can make it more intense but that isn't the feeling I am looking for while gaming.
9. Hard difficulty vs. easy difficulty.
Should have a mix of both. Don't have to go one way here an doing that has been the downfall of many games.
10. Questing vs. MOB grinding.
I prefer questing myself, but don't mind MOB grinding to be an option for those that prefer it.
11. PvE having best drops vs. crafting making best gear.
They should be on the same level. You should have gear that can be crafted that is just as good as any drop or why have crafting in the first place. This is the one area so many game screw up. All you have to do is make the work to craft the gear that is great just as tedious as the PvE is to get. Make it have to have things that come from all other areas of the game where people have to rely on others if they don't prefer the playsytle that will get the components needed. You have to have a Auction House system for this to truly work though.
12. Questing/kill based advancement vs. usage base advancement.
I think there should be a mix of all of the above.
13. themepark vs. sandbox.
Neither, I like a mix of both. Each is good in its own rights, but I think if done right what is now called a sandpark can be one of the best iterations.
14. End game vs. no end game.
I personally detest this term. It is what has ruined a lot of games. People blow through content because they believe that the game doesn't start till that term end game happens. Worst term to ever come to gaming in my opinion. Yes there should be things to do at max level but the idea that the game doesn't start to then is ludicrous.
15. Cash shops vs. cosmetic or no cash shop.
Fully support cosmetic cash shops as long as they don't put every single item that looks worth a damn in it as the only means to get it. Should have some way to gain cash shop currency through gameplay as a reward over time type of thing.
16. F2P vs. B2P vs. P2P.
Prefer P2P as long as it is 100% everything with no shops of any kind. If it is going to have cash shops it should be B2P as all developers should get something for the time they put into building the game. F2P is the worst model ever created because they now push out trash games as fast as they can because they expect to get their funding through add ons and cash shop.
I swear people just enjoy being contrary just to make statements.
I recall this was your post and you raising this issue.
I never raised an issue. You had an issue. I am just asking opinions on what people like in MMORPG and you got triggered over semantics. You know exactly what I am talking about but decided to make it a triggering issue for you out of context.
You asked for our opinions on a list of issues, one of which included as a possible choice the term "forced grouping." Which as you now know is a term I find to be nonsense.
I want to share a thought. Maybe these quest hub MMORPGs we got now are forced content? The old Everquest may have been forced grouping.
I never realized until a few days ago that's what they're. Forced content. When I look at my gameplay that's exactly what's going on. I'm going from quest to quest. I don't feel like it's my own narrative. I'm dragged along by the writers, as are all the other players. At least in EQ1 I felt like I followed my calling more, maybe it's because I rarely did any of the quests--and they were disjointed and hard to follow along to be honest. I'm not asserting I altogether don't enjoy the modern quest hub gameplay, rather I'm tryign to convey it's a different style of gameplay, as opposed to a linear improvement. Linear improvements are like when you add more polygons to a model, resulting in it having a more appealing appearance. Most people can agree that's an improvement. When it pertains to gameplay, disagreement is much more prevalent.
So why forced content? Because it prevents lulls. It prevents the player from getting lost. It creates their narrative. It sets their priorities. It leads them on and gives them a purpose. It allows the designer to stage an elaborate performance. It's about control, enabling the makers to WOW their audience. This is why the characters Neo or Gandalf are so memorable, and yet the random characters we've all made in many different RPGs are frequently forgotten.
I dislike forced content in MMORPG in most cases. This is why I would limit required quest to just class quest to gain ability to truly understand the ability and or class. Then off to the real game.
Does the MMORPG community really need 100 levels of easy generic questing or killing 1 million NPCs to learn how to play? Neither is that enjoyable which is why developers have made it easy mode to get it over with fast. Why include it at all if you just bypass it with easy play and money?
It's no wonder why the genre is in the state it's in when you have a slow development cycle technically limited genre bogged down in dated bad gameplay.
I swear people just enjoy being contrary just to make statements.
I recall this was your post and you raising this issue.
I never raised an issue. You had an issue. I am just asking opinions on what people like in MMORPG and you got triggered over semantics. You know exactly what I am talking about but decided to make it a triggering issue for you out of context.
You asked for our opinions on a list of issues, one of which included as a possible choice the term "forced grouping." Which as you now know is a term I find to be nonsense.
I want to share a thought. Maybe these quest hub MMORPGs we got now are forced content? The old Everquest may have been forced grouping.
I never realized until a few days ago that's what they're. Forced content. When I look at my gameplay that's exactly what's going on. I'm going from quest to quest. I don't feel like it's my own narrative. I'm dragged along by the writers, as are all the other players. At least in EQ1 I felt like I followed my calling more, maybe it's because I rarely did any of the quests--and they were disjointed and hard to follow along to be honest. I'm not asserting I altogether don't enjoy the modern quest hub gameplay, rather I'm trying to convey it's a different style of gameplay, as opposed to a linear improvement. Linear improvements are like when you add more polygons to a model, resulting in it having a more appealing appearance. Most people can agree that's an improvement. When it pertains to gameplay, disagreement is much more prevalent.
So why forced content? Because it prevents lulls. It prevents the player from getting lost. It creates their narrative. It sets their priorities. It leads them on and gives them a purpose. It allows the designer to stage an elaborate performance. It's about control, enabling the makers to WOW their audience. This is why the characters Neo or Gandalf are so memorable, and yet the random characters we've all made in many different RPGs are frequently forgotten.
As a writer and also as a gamer who likes questing, I agree that the purpose of quests is to give players a well-paced narrative experience and help them feel oriented and immersed in the daily life and world events of the game world. On the other hand, while MMO questing used to be 'forced' in the sense that doing class quests was the only way to unlock certain class abilities, or in other cases a quest chain was necessary to gain access to a dungeon or NPC town, this has been largely removed from existing MMOs. If you look at WoW and its clones today, many of them removed required quests like 5 years ago. Normal questing otoh can't really be described as forced since players can ignore it, and have little difficulty leveling up and getting gear without doing any quests.
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.
Some of you guys could pool funds, build a game, and still do better than AAA studios.
Who specifically, and how would you recommend reconciling any differences in their preferences? I really want to see you make up the roster of this hypothetical studio like it is a fantasy football team. Or more than one studio if you see multiple groups among the posters. (Anyone else can also attempt this if they feel like it.)
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.
Some of you guys could pool funds, build a game, and still do better than AAA studios.
Who specifically, and how would you recommend reconciling any differences in their preferences? I really want to see you make up the roster of this hypothetical studio like it is a fantasy football team. Or more than one studio if you see multiple groups among the posters. (Anyone else can also attempt this if they feel like it.)
Obviously a team lead. But there are a lot of differences in opinion.
Some of you guys could pool funds, build a game, and still do better than AAA studios.
Who specifically, and how would you recommend reconciling any differences in their preferences? I really want to see you make up the roster of this hypothetical studio like it is a fantasy football team. Or more than one studio if you see multiple groups among the posters. (Anyone else can also attempt this if they feel like it.)
Obviously a team lead. But there are a lot of differences in opinion.
Well actually I meant if NorseGod was using the survey responses from this thread to create a group and a game description, what would the specific group and the specific compromise game description be. Could even use posts in other threads like the Franken-MMO one also.
In a normal process of discussing and eventually greenlighting a game concept for development, that discussion rarely includes anyone who isn't a lead of some kind unless there's a secretary or moderator of some kind. So yes, I agree that it would pretty much have to be a lead making those decisions normally.
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.
As a writer and also as a gamer who likes questing, I agree that the purpose of quests is to give players a well-paced narrative experience and help them feel oriented and immersed in the daily life and world events of the game world. On the other hand, while MMO questing used to be 'forced' in the sense that doing class quests was the only way to unlock certain class abilities, or in other cases a quest chain was necessary to gain access to a dungeon or NPC town, this has been largely removed from existing MMOs. If you look at WoW and its clones today, many of them removed required quests like 5 years ago. Normal questing otoh can't really be described as forced since players can ignore it, and have little difficulty leveling up and getting gear without doing any quests.
I do not think the generic quest line have a place in the MMO games. The MMO quests should be player to player, and focused on cooperation and competition among the players. Not about you, but about your party, clan, guild. The problem with the quests in the MMOs now is, that they are solo. So they create kind of instanced experience for the player.
I don't mine optional generic quest. I rather them be procedurally generated and solved once completed. See no point in having lingering wolves killing livestock quest when you could have it appear randomly at farms and solved once the problem is done.
Some of you guys could pool funds, build a game, and still do better than AAA studios.
I don't think many people on here have actual game development experience - it would be like getting a bunch of amateur interior decorators together to build a house from the ground up.
Some of you guys could pool funds, build a game, and still do better than AAA studios.
I don't think many people on here have actual game development experience - it would be like getting a bunch of amateur interior decorators together to build a house from the ground up.
That would be fun anyway though, right? (I do in fact have indie game design experience, about 2 decades of it, so I'm pretty philosophical about the fact that indie game development rarely results in a game but instead is worthwhile because of the collaborative creativity and the self-improvement that it motivates people to.)
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.
Some of you guys could pool funds, build a game, and still do better than AAA studios.
I don't think many people on here have actual game development experience - it would be like getting a bunch of amateur interior decorators together to build a house from the ground up.
On the flip side, many "professionals" get into a mindset and think, "That's not how it's done..." Who designed the first video games? Certainly not experts or professionals. Some of those games may even been fun
Sometimes, ignorance opens doors into new spaces.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
As a writer and also as a gamer who likes questing, I agree that the purpose of quests is to give players a well-paced narrative experience and help them feel oriented and immersed in the daily life and world events of the game world. On the other hand, while MMO questing used to be 'forced' in the sense that doing class quests was the only way to unlock certain class abilities, or in other cases a quest chain was necessary to gain access to a dungeon or NPC town, this has been largely removed from existing MMOs. If you look at WoW and its clones today, many of them removed required quests like 5 years ago. Normal questing otoh can't really be described as forced since players can ignore it, and have little difficulty leveling up and getting gear without doing any quests.
I think you're probably largely right. I was basing my opinion on my recent playtime with Neverwinter and Everquest 2 and LOTR. Everquest 2 is old. LOTR is old. Neverwinter was released in 2016, I thinkk. The experience was what I explained. It was going from quest hub to quest hub, without any other obvious options. It was linear--no backtracking or going outside the box. I can't even recall if I got any experience from killing monsters in Neverwinter. I felt like I was on a railroad and all the other players were doing the same quests or had already done them. It felt like single player with MMO sideshow.
But honestly I haven't played them enough. I played EQ2 up until 19 and LOTRO up until 8 and Neverwinter up until 7 or something. I don't think the low levels represent all of it. In fact, I KNOW they're much more than that. But I do think it's sad how the designers feel like they have to put us on a leash early on. And I do think some players like it that way. They want direction and the designers are giving it to them. The problem is the designers are going too far sometimes, in that they assume all new players are this way, or that new players in general need strong direction. Some sure, but I don't like strong. I've always preferred being thrown in the world with just a sack and some general direction, but lots of leeway and options if I should go my own way.
Thanks. And hey I sometimes like questing too. Don't get me the wrong way. I'm not trying to start a fight over this.
I don't mine optional generic quest. I rather them be procedurally generated and solved once completed. See no point in having lingering wolves killing livestock quest when you could have it appear randomly at farms and solved once the problem is done.
Well, obviously a real MMO quest will not be generic. It will be about the relations among the players. Like if you need a sword, that can be crafted only by certain dwarf. But you do not want to play with dwarf, so you give the task to another player who like it. In fact this is kind of made in L2. Or you want to steal the sword of another player, so you hire thieves. Or you want players to help you with boss, instead - LFP, you will make a quest. Well such a game will not be very playable solo. But if a MMO server is empty, it is boring anyway. So I do not see a reason to make MMOs solo games.
It can be both. NPC provide some structure. Generic task from NPCs and players are fine as long as they fit the lore. A player may need a items and puts up a task or order for it. NPCs can issues based on lore.
MMORPG to me should be more about the world not purely about co-op or PvP. Not all adventures have to be gang banging either. Interactions in trade, community and etc make the world feel more alive than just multiplayer combat.
Co-op and PVP are done much better in other genre's. The chance to be in a online world inhabited by other players is the sole advantage MMORPG have. Sadly it's highly underused.
The first smart person to make a true high fantasy Destiny style games will put the nail in the coffin for most of the genre.
Vermillion_Raventhal. I am not a big fan of people making posts asking folks what they think, and then quarreling with them after they answer. Or when people do that to bump their own posts. If you want to go on thinking that games with group content are somehow forcing you to group, you just go on thinking that.
Yeah, he and most of the gaming community think that. We ALL understand what you are trying to argue about, and your point is baseless at best. It is semantics, and at this point, incredibly childish. Honestly, if you don't understand the question, the internet is not a place you should be at this point.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Comments
There will be special PvP events in which everyone can participate, even those who have disabled it.
Now its free to play they say, and turns into pay to win big time. These tend to be riddled with the most cussing and fussing, and selling drugs since its the lower class of people playing.
Diagonal. You can choose whether to get stronger vertically or unlock new skills horizontally each time you gain a level, so you can either be a tower of strength or a warehouse of versatility, and everything in between. Obviously this would only work in a rock paper scissors combat system.
2. Levels vs. no levels/no power platform levels.
Levels. They're the simplest way to represent progression and I don't think there's anything wrong with them.
3. Simulation vs. game first.
Simulation. I have exponentially more fun in a game when I'm immersed in it.
4. No death penalty or harsh death penalty.
Corpse runs to retrieve gear/loot, and possibly a death counter that permakills your character after accumulating a certain number of kills.
5. Forced grouping vs. optional grouping/solo play.
Strongly encouraged grouping. You can try to solo, but you won't get far unless you're playing a stealth class (which also makes RP sense to be for soloers).
6. Player housing or no player housing.
Player housing all the way. Preferably open world, and serving functions other than just somewhere to hold online parties, such as farming the surrounding lands, operating a (NPC staffed) shop, maintaining a private crafting workshop, etc.
7. Open World PvP vs. restricted PvP or no PvP.
No PvP outside designated arenas, unless the game is built around faction warfare, or it's necessary for the game's setting (e.g. a Wild West game would feel weird without outlaws, an age of sail game would feel weird without pirates, etc), but even then choosing to PvP should not be a decision to be taken lightly - perhaps you enable permadeath when you become an outlaw.
8. Full loot vs. limited or no looting.
No loot unless outlaws/bandits are in the game. Otherwise the PvP should be focused on larger aims, such as capturing enemy cities, rather than looting the enemy. If the game doesn't have PvP, there's even less of a reason to have looting, because it discourages players from helping others when they get in trouble and encourages luring without any real upside.
9. Hard difficulty vs. easy difficulty.
Hard. Even attacking a lone goblin scout should have the possibility of you getting curbstomped by his friends hiding in the bushes for an ambush. This ties into encouraging grouping/stealthing.
10. Questing vs. MOB grinding.
Neither. MMO quests as they currently exist are awful, and the only thing that's worse is sitting in the same clearing for hours killing the same five wolves as they respawn. Mobs shouldn't be waiting around for you to kill them, they should be wandering through the open world or living in their own dens/dungeons/encampments/etc that spawn in different locations every time they are destroyed - think Skyrim for example. XP for combat classes (and yes there should be non combat classes) should come from killing these mobs or (for bonus XP) clearing out their home bases.
11. PvE having best drops vs. crafting making best gear.
Crafted gear should be the best, but crafters should get their recipes from reverse engineering looted gear. For example, you might find a rather weak rusted dagger that has a poweful runic inscription - a crafter can reverse engineer it to apply that inscription to a brand new mithril greatsword.
12. Questing/kill based advancement vs. usage base advancement.
Pretty much already answered this in 10.
13. themepark vs. sandbox.
Sandpark. 70% sandbox, 30% themepark.
14. End game vs. no end game.
No traditional end game. Gear treadmills are boring as hell, but endgame activities like faction warfare or player owned city management have the potential to really take advantage of the MM in MMORPG.
15. Cash shops vs. cosmetic or no cash shop.
No cash shop of any kind. Everything in the game must be earned in game, including cosmetics.
16. F2P vs. B2P vs. P2P.
P2P. I'll happily pay $30/month if it means no cash shop.
Once upon a time....
Does the MMORPG community really need 100 levels of easy generic questing or killing 1 million NPCs to learn how to play? Neither is that enjoyable which is why developers have made it easy mode to get it over with fast. Why include it at all if you just bypass it with easy play and money?
It's no wonder why the genre is in the state it's in when you have a slow development cycle technically limited genre bogged down in dated bad gameplay.
In a normal process of discussing and eventually greenlighting a game concept for development, that discussion rarely includes anyone who isn't a lead of some kind unless there's a secretary or moderator of some kind. So yes, I agree that it would pretty much have to be a lead making those decisions normally.
Sometimes, ignorance opens doors into new spaces.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
MMORPG to me should be more about the world not purely about co-op or PvP. Not all adventures have to be gang banging either. Interactions in trade, community and etc make the world feel more alive than just multiplayer combat.
Co-op and PVP are done much better in other genre's. The chance to be in a online world inhabited by other players is the sole advantage MMORPG have. Sadly it's highly underused.
The first smart person to make a true high fantasy Destiny style games will put the nail in the coffin for most of the genre.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.