Howdy, Stranger!

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



I am a Swedish RPG fan who sometime make pen and paper stuff for roleplaying conventions. I love RPGs, MMOs and turned based strategy games, listens to metal and work as a CNC coder/industrial worker.  I currently live in Malmö (next to Coopenhagen) but will be moving to Öland soon. And for the moment I work weekends so I have plenty of spare time on weekdays but will be unavaliable saturdays and sundays. And I know stuff about history that makes people stare very strangely at me, just love to read about the past without any specific favorite period. I can use a sword, have a good one as well (hand made copy with the original from about year 1000) as a chainmail and helmet but I wouldn't call myself good with it. My favorite beverage is Guiness.


Last Active
Favorite Role
Currently Playing
  • What uncommon setting(s) do you think would work well for an MMO?

    It depends, for a levelbased trinity combat game you basically can choose between high fantasy and low fantasy, it doesn't work well for anything historical or semi realistic with firearms. Even something like 3 musketeers would be a stretch there.

    A setting like Shadowrun (cyperpunk fantasy?) would be awesome but require rather different mechanics from what we are used to.

    Anything with semi modern firearms (early 1800s+) really demands a system where being hit in the head would be a very bad thing indeed. That doesn't mean you can't have progression but it means any combat is risky since even the worst opponent could kill you with a lucky shot.

    A bullet proof vest helps of course but such game require tactics, an ambush is far more deadly when the opponent have rifles then swords and bows.

    That doesn't mean it is less fun, I would say it can be more fun but you would always have to think a bit before jumping into a fight unless you are willing to die a lot.

    With that in mind there are plenty of interesting settings, from Wild west and steampunk that have already been mentioned to cyberpunk, dieselpunk (remember the Crimson skies setting?) and a lot of other more moddern and sci-fi options.

    With current level based mechanics I think the low fantasy pen and paper RPG "Iron heroes" (made by Monty Cook who also worked on D&D 3rd edition and Pathfinder) would be really fun. It is a low magic game with focus on character development instead of gear. You don't have combat healers but you have a pool that will fill over to your HPs to heal you after each combat to cut out downtime.

    The classes are rather different from D&D (and MMOs) since they are based on your combat style, not your profession. You archer, executioner or armigeer could be a soldier, a smith or almost anything else, the difference is that the armigeer is tankish character that uses his armor to tire out the opponent before going for the kill while the archer is a sniper. The executioner go for hitting vital spots...

    Anyways, not relying on magical stuff but far more focus on your character would make an interesting game and magic is somewhat weaker and less reliable then what we are used to in MMOs.
  • Frustration?

    DMKano said:
    Ugh - EQ2 for me remains one of the worst MMOs on the market, was a weak attempt at WoW. 

    Project 99 is better in every way possible, and has no monthly sub and no cash shop and has gameplay that is for me - better in every way possible compared to EQ2.

    I mean EQ2 was made for people who didn't like EQ1 - so everything that I loved about EQ1 like all the cool gameplay mechanics - they completely destroyed that in EQ2.
    You do know that EQ2 released 6 weeks before Wow, right?

    It is certainly true that it have taken features from Wow after it became so successful but it was released before Wow. If it was a weak attempt of anything it was to make a more mainstream version of EQ.

    I kinda liked EQ2 once myself, but the game have had far too many expansions and it's best before date was 10 years ago. It also have a terrible coded engine, just slightly better then Vanguards so expect low framerate even if you have a good computer.

    I would stay clear of the game, wait for Pantheon to release instead.
  • Do we really need something new ?

    Darksworm said:
    Everyone copied rift, though. GW2 has events similar to it. ESO anchor events are a literal copy of Rifts. I’d even argue World Quests in WoW are related. Fates in FFXIV are a copy of it. 

    Thats pretty standard Quo in MMOs now. It makes the game feel like it has a lot to do, even when much of it is duplicative it derivative. 
    Warhammer Age of Reckoning had public quests (events) even before Rift came out. Also, GW2 was in development before or around the same time Rift was in development. GW2 was going to be a campaign for GW1 then it evolved into a new game. Correct me if im wrong.
    Well, basically were Anet working on a guildwars campaign called "Guildwars: Utopia" but realized that adding the mechanics they wanted would require almost as much work as making a new game and when they got funding for it they went for the sequel instead.

    And yes, Strain talked about a kind of DEs (with me and others) on a forum in 2009 already and probably planned it before that as well.

    In any case is GW2s DEs very different from Rifts invasions and rifts, they are closer to Warhammers public quests but far better implemented.

    Rifts idea was more to threaten an area so players would need to clear things so it wouldn't grow and make things like quests and vendors in the area useless. It was to add a little more to do and get a little co-operation between players in an area.

    Warhammers idea was to add some large quests for everyone in an area, the problem was that they didn't scale or pop when enough people were there so they often failed due to player numbers.

    GW2s idea was to replace regular quests with dynamic quests to present the quests in a different way from other MMOs. They added heart quest in the closed beta because many people were confused on what to so they also have some more traditional quests as well.

    They also made the "quests" scaling and allowed anyone in the area join if they wanted to.

    Anyways, the 3 games have a similar base idea which WAR indeed was first with (even if we seen GMs run similar events in earlier games) but they have different reasons to add them and different mechanics.

    GW2 was first with replacing quests with DEs but it didn't exactly invent DEs as such. Makes one wonder if there are other good ways to present quests, I must admit that DEs sometimes makes a more interesting experience then quests. For instance you can get a quests telling you to save a town from bandits and the bandits wait until you get there. In a DE you see them starting fires and pillage the village, it makes me more likely to jump in and save people.

    And the more ways a MMO can present story (or "quests") the less repetetive it feels. :)
  • Sources Claim Disney Has Reached Out to Ubisoft & Activision About Star Wars Games - Star Wars: Batt

    Bethesda, Bethesda, Bethesda. That's what I want to hear.
    Them or Rockstar. Either of them have the potential to give us a really good game. I fear Disney might have a slight problem with Rockstars image though.

    If I had to choose between EA, Activision and Ubisoft I would go for Ubisoft, best of the worst. ;)
  • If you were to design your own MMO, what would you leave out?

    iixviiiix said:
    Bind on pickup and bind on equip .
    Most other can be useful with right among , but this is ... i don't want it .

    Other is level requirement to do things , i hate it .
    You know, AoC released without that.  They gave up after a couple of months though since it wasted the economy. The prices of any none endgame item were so low it was no use putting it on the marketplace, everything below best in the game were worth vendortrash money since people just saved full good sets of each levelrank in the bank and everything else got put on the AH.

    Levelrequirement is another matter, you can get rid of that if you do like the first Diablo and set the requirement on stats instead. If you take away all requirement though you could just skip all gear below max level since no-one that earned a little cash would want it under any circomstances. In that case it would be better to skip levels altogether instead.

    Both of those ideas sounds good at first look but they don't work since they screw up the economy.

    Anyways: I would start by getting rid of daily quests. They make no-one happy and add the most pointless boring grind I ever seen in the 22 years I played MMORPGs.

    I also would get rid of the huge powergap that makes PvP so boring. A small powergap is more fun.

    Another thing I would skip is all simple and boring quests. Kill 10 rats in the moat? no way.

    Quests should be fun and hard and we don't need 5K of them, 500 good and longer quests with some acceptable dynamic events and good dungeon gameplay is more what I like. And good PvP.