Avatar

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Badges

Loke666

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.

About

Username
Loke666
Joined
Visits
2,207
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
3,153
Rank
Epic
Favorite Role
DPS
Currently Playing
Gw2
Posts
21,263
Badges
47
  • Expansion's never able to fit well

    Sovrath said:
    Yeah but that's the point, we enjoy gaining levels that have meaning. In a pvp game that means more power. In a pve game that should be more power and perhaps alterations on current skills or adding skills.

    Not every game is Lord of the Rings online where they add a few levels that only get you more hit points and that is about it.
    Almost every game I played at least have some pointless levels that only give you a few HP. Usually you get some kind of skill or upgrade every 5th level or so, the other 4 are therefore a huge waste of space. Yes, they ggive you some extra HP but they only divide the server more without giving the players anything (it is easier to team up a lvl 9 and lvl 10 char in DDO then a Lvl 52 and a lvl 57 in Wow).

    But the worst thing is that they make leveling so commonplace that you feel less achivement each time you hit a new level. When levels are rarer they both have more meaning and give out a better kick each time you level up.
    Sovrath
  • What uncommon setting(s) do you think would work well for an MMO?

    any setting could do well.. hard part is making it happen.
    Well, almost at least. There are a few that are so politically loaded that we probably do well staying far from them. Things like the holocaust is not something I think anyone sould pull off.

    But besides that you are right, with the right mechanics and fun gameplay you could probably turn almost any setting into a success. In many cases is that far harder then others though and a crappy made setting needs an awesome system to be fun.
    anemo
  • The Importance of Story and Lore in the MMORPG

    ikcin said:

    But why you need a dev written personal story in a multiplayer game?
    One could wonder that but since it is completelly optional it isn't a big problem. Skip it and you don't loose anything.

    As I see it, GW2s personal story is made for the people that enjoy single player RPGs and just put in so they might sell some boxes to them as well.

    In my case they could just have skipped it and added a few more open world zones instead.
    UngoodConsuetudo
  • The Importance of Story and Lore in the MMORPG

    Story = The narrative your character experiences, either mandated by developers or created by you 
    Lore = Background information about the game world that you do not personally experience but which gives flavor to your story

    I do not believe that story should be important compared to lore, yet developers seem to disagree with me. From voiceovers to heavily instanced story missions etc, MMORPGs increasingly resemble single player games with their emphasis on "story-driven gameplay." 

    I'm going through vanilla WoW again, and there is a story there, but it's completely optional and only matters if you want to pay attention. You can toggle slow quest text for example, but you can also have it appear instantly and not care. There is, however, tons of awesome lore that is all pervading.

    I think at the heart of the MMO should be multiplayer gameplay and lore (not story). When I was younger, I was rather antisocial and played MMOs as if they were solo games, but they aren't. The experience is vastly more rewarding when you are social and encouraged to be social. I think that the focus on story takes away from the potential for player-created stories with friends. 
    I think that one important factor of the story is how you present it. Many MMOs spoon feed you the story in quests and railroad you through it with no choices or reasons for you to think about it.

    You could also present the story mixed in with lore and exploration, opening up more story as the player discover the background lore instead.

    Too much story focus is a bad thing since it just have you run around doing the exact same thing as everyone else all the time and it kills the replay value of the game. But you can have plenty of story and still have a fun game as long as you cut down on railroading and questchains.

    You certainly should have more lore then story but done right those 2 are connected and make more sense. Removing the story isn't good either.

    A lot of the problem with the story is how it is presented today, you take a quest that gives you exact steps and map directions on how to do it, you follow them to the letter and end with turnin. You often can't even switch the order and you certainly can't improvise. No need to think or to strategize.

    If you use quests you should stop telling people exactly how to solve them, just give them the result you want and let people figure out a way to get it done, preferably with multiple solutions possible. A thief will try to use stealth and wits solving the issue while a warrior probably will use brawns instead, that is fine and make things more interesting.

    It is the handholding that is the largest problem today.
    UngoodConsuetudoAlBQuirky
  • 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.
    AlBQuirkydelete5230RemyVorender