MMOs talk about the grand adventure, but they give you the same day over and over again. You kill the same things over and over. Everything stays in the same place, every day is the same as yesterday. The same guy hands out the same lame quest, to everyone, everyday. Everybody does the same lame quests. Time has no meaning, players have no impact. The MMO genre will continue to stagnate and bore the game community until some developer steps up and makes a changing living world. One where time moves forward and tomorrow is different than today.
So let me get this straight... You want a quest to be made unavailable for everyone else, forever, after you complete it, leaving nothing for the player that's walking up behind you, headed toward that NPC you are currently talking to, looking for the quest?
I'm guessing you want them to come up with a random quest generator, that spits out gazillions of quests that are meaningless to any advancement to the storyline, just so that no two people do the same thing?
And as far as killing the same creature over and over... If you have your way with a living persistent world with as many players that will be playing in the same zones day in and day out, then what's going to happen is that zones are going to be completely wiped clean of creatures to kill, and as new players come through those zones for the first time or returning to the zone, there's going to be nothing there for them to hunt.... There has to be a respawn system.
I would think with the intensive programming that I'd imagined it would take to have gazillions of random quests that NEVER spits out the same quest twice, that the time involved in programming that, the game would never release...
So let me get this straight... You want a quest to be made unavailable for everyone else, forever, after you complete it, leaving nothing for the player that's walking up behind you, headed toward that NPC you are currently talking to, looking for the quest? I'm guessing you want them to come up with a random quest generator, that spits out gazillions of quests that are meaningless to any advancement to the storyline, just so that no two people do the same thing?
I sort of agree. In order to get continuous adventures for everyone. We need an endless supply of missions. You could go the random quest generator, or quests that more or less don't change anything (or not much) visibly.
I call these quests 'single state', because they are in the same state for all time.
I think a good next step would be to have 'double state' quests. In that going the quest changes the world from A to B. But then the next person who gets the quest changes it from B to A. So the world will change, you could go back there and see a difference. But since you are not the only person in the world, it may indeed be changed back by someone elses actions.
You could rescue the princess, but then the next persons quest would be to escort the princess back into the dungeon whereby she later on gets captured again.
MMOs talk about the grand adventure, but they give you the same day over and over again. You kill the same things over and over. Everything stays in the same place, every day is the same as yesterday. The same guy hands out the same lame quest, to everyone, everyday. Everybody does the same lame quests. Time has no meaning, players have no impact. The MMO genre will continue to stagnate and bore the game community until some developer steps up and makes a changing living world. One where time moves forward and tomorrow is different than today.
So let me get this straight... You want a quest to be made unavailable for everyone else, forever, after you complete it, leaving nothing for the player that's walking up behind you, headed toward that NPC you are currently talking to, looking for the quest?
I'm guessing you want them to come up with a random quest generator, that spits out gazillions of quests that are meaningless to any advancement to the storyline, just so that no two people do the same thing?
And as far as killing the same creature over and over... If you have your way with a living persistent world with as many players that will be playing in the same zones day in and day out, then what's going to happen is that zones are going to be completely wiped clean of creatures to kill, and as new players come through those zones for the first time or returning to the zone, there's going to be nothing there for them to hunt.... There has to be a respawn system.
I would think with the intensive programming that I'd imagined it would take to have gazillions of random quests that NEVER spits out the same quest twice, that the time involved in programming that, the game would never release...
I never said I wanted a quest made unavailable for anyone else. I don't care how many people take on a quest. I said I don't want to see the same NPC standing in the same place handing out the same quest. Do something more realistic! All I care about is that the quest has a unique feel for me. Therefore, decisions,choices and actions I take during the quest change the quest. I want the feeling that because of my game play how the quest unfolds is somewhat unique beyond did I did or did I not kill the beast?
I don't want a random quest generator, but there are choices in between total boring and linear quests and all auto generated. I'm now following the development of a game, Citadel of Sorcery that is doing this very thing. My understanding is that quests are hand written adventures with so much variation based on choice and actions that most players will find a unique path through each quest. That would be excellent.
A living persistent world does not have to pop monster back into existence, and it doesn't have to have areas wiped clean. This is lazy programming. the easy way out. Monsters should act alive, and repopulate an area by moving in, not by popping. Give me some world excuse at least for things, the artificial way in which most MMOs repopulate areas suck.
On your final point we totally agree, which is why you wouldn't make it so that there are gazilions of random quests. (See above).
Wow that's a lot of posts to go through This is a good subject.
Anyways, I recall an mmo game called Wakfu or something like that a long while back, declaring a dynamic system for their ecosystem in game.
They would have mobs spawning in different zones of the game, and they would have a total population of that species of mob. I remember they said that it is possible to hunt and kill a mob species to extinction. There are also the possibilities for mutations of a species for the mob to change over time into different species altogether.
Now I remember reading that and was impressed with the creativeness and daring (of course there would be idiots trying to hunt every single mob to extinction) plan for their eco system. This was one game where the maker was going to make thing not so static in terms of the mob spawning. Now I never did get into their beta tests due to time and .. well, I had forgotten about it by the time it was released. So if anyone here recognized that name and played it, maybe you can post here and tell me if they did pull it off, that eco system.
It was a highlight, and a real booster for my faith in the future of mmo's. Now, years later, I see more and more of the same thing. The asian mmo's are still cut from the same cookie cutter mold, the other mmo's are all WoW like it's a wonder there haven't been lawsuits.
Sure you have trends of development, like auto-pathing, pets, flying, mounts and instances... but they quickly became gimmicky as everyone and their rivals try to have one of each into their game.
I remember, and with absolute disgust, an mmo that has a built in bot. Hell, if you can't beat the botters and gold farmers, then just outnumber them right? This bot would play the game for you, all the player have to do is enter in a few parameters and leave the game to itself. You come back days later to see what the bot found(all "rare" items of course since you and everyone else can filter it all down to that. Is that still considered rare?) Awesome entertainment right? a game that play itself. I hope this does not become a trend.
Still hoping for changes and bold moves from the game developers, but that hope dwindles. The only one that is going to make big impact is probably if Blizzard declares one day they are going to make something different. They would have the popularity enough to get players to try new things... Like real physics combat instead of select target, press attack and wait for dice rolls for the next minute or two to see the results... *dodges the conservative purists* You will listen of course when someone like Blizzard say its ok! *shakes fist*
(Come on, everyone knows its the same crap every MMO do these days, that is not called combat, thats dice rolling.)
It's not a direct attempt to compare the two companies; rather the 2 claims; goodbye to ?! quests and goodbye to auto-attack. The latter seemed like a case where they made the promise, found they couldn't deliver on it, so they implemented a "worse than auto-attack" system to claim they kept the promise and not have to admit "easier said than done". It's my recollection that Cryptic was about as far into development when they started those claims as AN is now.
Well, other game have been better with no auto attack, like DDO. I forgot Roper was involved with Hellgate. the recollection is like "remembering" why the couch is covered in black soot.
There isn't enough of Whisky in Glasgow to make me forget that...
The event system, as I've read it, seems similar to public quests, with the exception that failure is possible through any of the "Acts", and sends the quest down another chain of events; the strategy may(but hopefully not) involve "player damming" where the worst scenario will play out until enough players come along to finish and reset the quest. So long as either kind of completion yields a reward superior to the other, they may get away with it. But I really have to wonder if they'll manage to make EVERY quest like this, and if that would even be a positive thing as you repeatedly hurry to an area as the quests reset.
They probably have one or several conditions that needs for the quest to be on, if all quests or some have this is hard to say. But they have focused on larger epic quest instead of fedex and ratcatcher quests. Gonna go over these and split. from the Wiki:
The first example shows the arrival of a dragon near a particular town or village. The players nearby that town or village can choose to fight the dragon. If they are successful, the dragon may flee or die, and the players involved are rewarded by the village elder; if the players fail, the dragon destroys a bridge vital to the village. At that time, the village people attempt to build a new bridge, and the players may help them by fending off a group of bandits that see the opportunity to attack. What happens if they fail to fend off the bandits? The bridge will still be out. Sooner or later will someone else get the quest. That bridge could be out for quite a while but I can tell you that the guys that finally fixes it will remember that for a long time. I don't want to be on a low pop server however.
In the second example, if a player happens to be inside a garrison when a scouting party returns, they may overhear the scouts warning of an approaching column of centaurs, intent on destroying the garrison. The players can then participate in defending the garrison from the attacking centaurs. If the players are successful, the garrison may ask them to participate in a counterattack. If they are not successful, or if they weren't at the garrison in time to save the garrison, they may join other soldiers from a nearby town attempting to recapture the garrison. I assume here, if capturing the garrison fails, it just remains captured?
Same as with the bridge. If you mess things up it will affect the server, as will it if you do things great. That is in my opinion how things should be. The third example involves a player walking along a familiar road, but this time they happen upon a caravan traveling along the road. They can choose to travel with the caravan, and defend it from roving bandits, or not.
Do they enter an instance for this, I wonder? So there aren't tons of caravans with baddies in tow on the roads? It depends on how common a caravan is, a few each day into town seems plausible to me. I don't think they will instance it, they will have some instances however so it is hard to say, I have no inside information except from what I read in articles and forums, some of the stuff is written directly by the devs but they are not always clear with everything. And my golden q' for them all: Is the plan to make these encounters scalable based on attendance? Good question, I don't know that. I doubt that they will do it for the dragon, but I am sure that the event will be shouted out in the OCC by a player and it shouldn't be hard to find a group for that. But they could work more like WARs public quests too, I don't know that either. What I do know is that the devs have spent a lot of time thinking about this. The reason Guildwars was made the way it was is because Arenanet couldn't afford to make the game they really wanted, they say they have that money now and are doing it. They were also the original team that started on Wow so they do know what can be done and not. I am not sure exactly how the whole game will work, but I am sure that I will buy it, if for nothing else to support the B2P MMO payment method but I like games that try something new instead of the same old stuff. And I also liked the first Guildwars.
MMOs talk about the grand adventure, but they give you the same day over and over again. You kill the same things over and over. Everything stays in the same place, every day is the same as yesterday. The same guy hands out the same lame quest, to everyone, everyday. Everybody does the same lame quests. Time has no meaning, players have no impact. The MMO genre will continue to stagnate and bore the game community until some developer steps up and makes a changing living world. One where time moves forward and tomorrow is different than today.
Hehe I know the feeling bro. I'm former Asheron's Call player.. I have seen no game that is fun as this game. Final Fantasy 11 online is 2nd to me for mmorpg. The reason AC is best for me because it doesnt go same path as everyone.. once you entered the game, your on your own... you wanna do quest, go ahead, you wanna grind? Go ahead... Its not stopping you from going anywhere. Thats what I like about MMORPG. Thats what adventure comes into you because its free world, not following same path as everyone goes through.
Look, this is all I have to say. If your MMORPG stays the same every day, you need to find a better group of people to play with.
Actually does the game still looks same, it is people that differs.
Most people would probably have read more than the title before replying BTW, at least OPs full original post as a minimum.
I read the OP's argument. However, how often does life in your town differ? A new restaurant here, a new store there, a mall "update"? Every now and then, you may have a concert "event"? The thing is, the grand adventure in life is seeing new places. What we don't get is that the people in those places all think it stays the same and love it for that.
People expect too much. You can't give anything even close to as grand as life. All you can give people is a world to adventure in and the lore to back it.
You want a grand adventure? Go rid the world of crime. MMOs are made so that everyone can have an adventure in a world that isn't their own. That's not a grand adventure, it's simply high adventure.
It's funny. The people that complain about wanting a grand adventure in an MMO are the same people that complain when an MMO lets everyone feel like a grand hero. Referring to my example above, not everyone can rid the world of crime. In an MMO, if you were to rid the world in that MMO of crime, then wouldn't it be less of an achievement if everyone else could? Wouldn't it feel worthless that that crime came back just to be removed by the next in line?
The thing is, life is mostly static. An MMO is pretty much a life simulator of a life other than your own. It's the people that change things. So here's the moral of my post:
If you want a grand adventure, make a grand adventure. Don't whine to the devs that you can't have a grand adventure in their game. You wouldn't complain to God (or whatever being/force you believe created the universe) that you can't kill some omnipotent evil being would you?
EDIT: Another moral of this post:
Nothing in life would change without a little help from the people in it.
Topics like this are incredibly easy to talk endlessly about when you're not bound by the realities of budgets, limited resources, profitability, technical capability and on and on.
Plus, the marketplace is fickle. Even on a thread like this which is akin to "the choir", the folks preaching can't get universal agreement on what utopia looks like (even given theoretically unlimited resources) And it goes without saying that no one wants to pay a dime for anything - everyone feels they *already* pay "too much" and that the *current* fees should be providing the huge living utopian world dynamically changing day to day and populated by GMs who are trained actors.
Many on this thread have pointed out EVE and GW2. Wrath of the Lich King has quests which instance the entire overland world. So if I am farther along on a quest than you, Ive transparently moved into a different version of the continent and only players at that stage share it with me. Players on an earlier stage are on an earlier version. But I'm sure thats still not enough and WoW of course sucks as everyone knows
This subject of "why can't we have a completely real living world to escape into?!" has come up since the ancient days of MUDs (and MUDs were actually kind of close to this!) I guess it is just human nature for some to need to live in some manufactured world that is "better" than their real one.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of paying customers really just want a game that provides some fun and entertainment and don't obsess over the fact that their character doesn't have a working digestive system, doesn't need to use the bathroom, doesn't age in real time and isn't living in a world where each NPC is a sentient AI and nothing less than the self direction of these living artificial entities, combined with chaos and chance, drive the "story" forward.
Beyond what GW2, EVE and WoW are currently doing or planning to do, I really don't see how a *game* can do much more and still attract the majority of players. Fact is most people don't want to feel they "missed" anything (the 5 people on this thread say they dont care, but 12,000,000 threads across every game on every site of people bitching they dont get to do ALL of the content for THEIR $12 paint a different reality) The also don't want tremendous complexity or total ambiguity. The majority of paying customers don't want to log into a game that basically doesnt "need" you at all. Thats the whole point behind the type of quest content games use - to make you feel that the world "needs" you. If the world is living and evolving and leaving you *behind* every day you don't play, your character can't be viewed by NPCs as an integral part of the story. None of the "ah! the hero we have been looking for!" They found that hero. Two years before you joined
I think folks who want a total sandbox can find satisfaction (EVE). Obviously folks who like a sort of multi-player version of a single player RPG can find satisfaction (thats most MMOs). Folks who want a persistent FPS with a better rationale for why you're fighting can find satisfaction (DF, etc)
On the other hand, Folks who want the Star Trek holodeck are in for a big disappointment, and folks who basically want a single player MMO where other people are spectators (because, while not in THIS thread, in many threads the "suggestions" for how to "fix" MMOs I see come down to that) are also in for a big disappointment.
On the other hand, Folks who want the Star Trek holodeck are in for a big disappointment, and folks who basically want a single player MMO where other people are spectators (because, while not in THIS thread, in many threads the "suggestions" for how to "fix" MMOs I see come down to that) are also in for a big disappointment.
Your entire post was fantastic, by the way. I only clipped it to save space.
About this last paragraph....yes....when The Old Republic is released....I'm betting that people will start to see and understand, why Fable was a single player RPG.
If you want REAL adventure and excitement....I think it's going to be a while before we have that intense, vivid experience in an MMO. In the meantime, there ARE ways to have that.....
Oh sure....they may (or may not) be a bit cost prohibitive. I guarantee that they aren't for EVERYONE here. But if you want grand adventure, it comes with SOME sort of price. Even in games, people whine about "risk and reward." So here are three solutions. Choose any of them, or find another. Some people even put their lives up for auction on eBay and will trade lives with you, or just sell you theirs....including their jobs, homes, clothes...you can go REALLY "be someone else." The last story I read where someone did that, the man's name was Ian Usher, of Perth, Australia. I'm sure others will follow suit.
I guess what I'm trying to say here, is that the hunger for adventure that most people have....isn't likely going to be satisfied in an MMO. And it's really asking an awfully lot of developers to give you a new life to live that is as real as the biological one we're living. Seriously. It's like asking them to be gods...all powerful beings that can create universes of such realism and adventure that they can compare to the long evolved life on planet earth and.....be BETTER. That might happen one day, but that kind of universe has to evolve. They're not going to create it overnight. Think about that for a minute.....
Alot of strawman arguements here, that I see pretty much come down to "Man will never fly"... or perhaps more like, "No one has figured out how to make man fly yet, so everyone should quit trying".
There are two issues at play here....
1) Personal taste. Some people don't like the idea of a dynamic MMO... or possibly the trade-offs that such a game would require. That's perfectly fine, but those people need to realize that those are THEIR personal tastes and not every other person shares them..... no should they expect that EVERY game must cater to those tastes. There is no shortage of MMO's out there.... and that means that there is plenty of room in the market for games that cater to people with different tasts. Just like we accept the fact that some MMO's are PvP oriented and some are PVE, some are Group oriented others solo, some are Fantasy other Sci-Fi..... there is plenty of room for games that cater toward more static minded players and those that cater toward a more dynamic experience.
2) The second is practicalty. The are alot of issues, technical and otherwise that need to be addressed to make games more dynamic. That's ok...nothing worth doing is ever that easy. The nice thing about human beings are that we are very ingenuitive and we figure out new ways to solve problems all the time. Look it was really, really tough to make car's safe and more fuel efficient at the same time....but there have been huge strides made in that area since the 70's. It was really, really tough to for man to figure out how to fly...and there were litteraly thousands of failed attempts before one was successfull.
Making game-worlds more dynamic is hardly rocket-science by comparrison. In fact, alot of games have made small strides in that direction already....and more are in the works (really excited to see how GW2's system turns out). You know the "Star Trek holo-deck" thing would be awesome but I don't think anyone is seriously demanding/expecting that any time soon.
What people are doing/expecting is pressuring Developers to keep pushing the envelope.....and maybe making some suggestions of approaches that might be taken.... honestly there is nothing wrong with that... it's the only way you get better products (in ANY vertical). If customers get complacent or are satisfied with minimal expectations then so do the companies that serve them...... and frankly there ARE alot of developers that are complacent..... that's partly OUR fault for not demanding more from them.
For those of you that aren't fans of dynamic content.....don't freak out...alot of people share your tastes, there WILL be plenty of games out there for you to play....but remember it's a big market....don't try to impose your tastes on every game and every player.
For those of you, like me, who enjoy dynamic content....lets keep up the enthusiam for it.... one thing that spurs companies to make those sort of products is to realize that there is market demand for it. We won't get everything we dream of tomorrow but we don't need that.....all we need is a better offering then we have today. Any improvement we get is a step in the right direction.....and there is plenty of room for improvments (small and large)....and we ARE actually seeing some here and there.
On the other hand, Folks who want the Star Trek holodeck are in for a big disappointment, and folks who basically want a single player MMO where other people are spectators (because, while not in THIS thread, in many threads the "suggestions" for how to "fix" MMOs I see come down to that) are also in for a big disappointment.
Your entire post was fantastic, by the way. I only clipped it to save space.
About this last paragraph....yes....when The Old Republic is released....I'm betting that people will start to see and understand, why Fable was a single player RPG.
If you want REAL adventure and excitement....I think it's going to be a while before we have that intense, vivid experience in an MMO. In the meantime, there ARE ways to have that.....
Oh sure....they may (or may not) be a bit cost prohibitive. I guarantee that they aren't for EVERYONE here. But if you want grand adventure, it comes with SOME sort of price. Even in games, people whine about "risk and reward." So here are three solutions. Choose any of them, or find another. Some people even put their lives up for auction on eBay and will trade lives with you, or just sell you theirs....including their jobs, homes, clothes...you can go REALLY "be someone else." The last story I read where someone did that, the man's name was Ian Usher, of Perth, Australia. I'm sure others will follow suit.
I guess what I'm trying to say here, is that the hunger for adventure that most people have....isn't likely going to be satisfied in an MMO. And it's really asking an awfully lot of developers to give you a new life to live that is as real as the biological one we're living. Seriously. It's like asking them to be gods...all powerful beings that can create universes of such realism and adventure that they can compare to the long evolved life on planet earth and.....be BETTER. That might happen one day, but that kind of universe has to evolve. They're not going to create it overnight. Think about that for a minute.....
GirlGeek,
I don't think people here are asking for games to take the place of RL adventure..... I've had more then my share of those, including a few that I really don't care to repeat (Try riding through Class 5 white-water OUTSIDE the raft some-time ***shudder***).... Their just asking for a somewhat different game-play experience then what they are being offered today.
Originally posted by GrumpyMel2 GirlGeek, I don't think people here are asking for games to take the place of RL adventure..... I've had more then my share of those, including a few that I really don't care to repeat (Try riding through Class 5 white-water OUTSIDE the raft some-time ***shudder***).... Their just asking for a somewhat different game-play experience then what they are being offered today.
Same here. I have other hobbies for adventure and challenge, but that doesn't mean I want a bland game. I can get all the scripted entertainment I want from books and movies.
Originally posted by GrumpyMel2 GirlGeek, I don't think people here are asking for games to take the place of RL adventure..... I've had more then my share of those, including a few that I really don't care to repeat (Try riding through Class 5 white-water OUTSIDE the raft some-time ***shudder***).... Their just asking for a somewhat different game-play experience then what they are being offered today.
Same here. I have other hobbies for adventure and challenge, but that doesn't mean I want a bland game. I can get all the scripted entertainment I want from books and movies.
You two are preachin' to the choir here. I am TOTALLY for dynamic content. However....some of us (not all) really ARE asking for a world to escape into that is better than the one we live in. Some peoples' lives really are that desperately sad. Just because yours isn't...certainly doesn't mean that some aren't. I'm not telling you anything here you don't already know either. That's the bunch I was talking to in that post....the ones that really DO want, something better than RL. They won't find it....at least not for a while yet, if ever.
There's also the direct opposite group, who get their panties in a twist when a developer TRIES to add dynamic content and it de-rails their normal daily in game activities. I was the one that posted about loving the scourge invasion in WoW and being so annoyed by the people who got all freaked out about it. It was the first time in years, that WoW actually felt alive. And yes...I understand that the implementation of it, was skewed and not perfect. However....it was an ATTEMPT by a developer to inject a bit of shock and awe and surprise into the virtual world. In modern day MMOs....even an attempt is better than nothing. But people whine about it so much, I doubt that, at least Blizzard, would try anything remotely similar again. You should have SEEN the forum threads about it....literally hundreds and hundreds of pages of QQ.
I look forward to the days of MMOs in the future that will be more of a living, changing, fluid environment. Those days will come. And the people that don't like that dynamic changing world...will always have games to play that don't have it. Like a previous poster said....there's plenty of room in the genre for all of our likes and preferences to be represented. But a game....a game....is never going to be equivalent to real life. The adrenaline rush you get from a massive boss fight, is very different than the one you get when you're standing a mile away from a massive tornado. (Just an example.)
I guess what I'm trying to say here, is that the hunger for adventure that most people have....isn't likely going to be satisfied in an MMO. And it's really asking an awfully lot of developers to give you a new life to live that is as real as the biological one we're living. Seriously. It's like asking them to be gods...all powerful beings that can create universes of such realism and adventure that they can compare to the long evolved life on planet earth and.....be BETTER. That might happen one day, but that kind of universe has to evolve. They're not going to create it overnight. Think about that for a minute.....
GirlGeek,
I don't think people here are asking for games to take the place of RL adventure..... I've had more then my share of those, including a few that I really don't care to repeat (Try riding through Class 5 white-water OUTSIDE the raft some-time ***shudder***).... Their just asking for a somewhat different game-play experience then what they are being offered today.
Oh yes....SOME of them ARE. But most of those people won't be honest about that, because it would imply that their real lives are boring.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of paying customers really just want a game that provides some fun and entertainment and don't obsess over the fact that their character doesn't have a working digestive system, doesn't need to use the bathroom, doesn't age in real time and isn't living in a world where each NPC is a sentient AI and nothing less than the self direction of these living artificial entities, combined with chaos and chance, drive the "story" forward.
Beyond what GW2, EVE and WoW are currently doing or planning to do, I really don't see how a *game* can do much more and still attract the majority of players. Fact is most people don't want to feel they "missed" anything (the 5 people on this thread say they dont care, but 12,000,000 threads across every game on every site of people bitching they dont get to do ALL of the content for THEIR $12 paint a different reality) The also don't want tremendous complexity or total ambiguity. The majority of paying customers don't want to log into a game that basically doesnt "need" you at all. Thats the whole point behind the type of quest content games use - to make you feel that the world "needs" you. If the world is living and evolving and leaving you *behind* every day you don't play, your character can't be viewed by NPCs as an integral part of the story. None of the "ah! the hero we have been looking for!" They found that hero. Two years before you joined
Well said. That is basically the issue. In fact, we have technologies with NPCs having a daily routine back in Ultima 6 days. There is a reason why no games use that anymore. It is frustrating to have to WAIT for NPCs to open their shops. It is bad enough in SP games where you need to hit some key to wait and it will be totally have the player pop in uproar on a MMO.
There's also the direct opposite group, who get their panties in a twist when a developer TRIES to add dynamic content and it de-rails their normal daily in game activities. I was the one that posted about loving the scourge invasion in WoW and being so annoyed by the people who got all freaked out about it. It was the first time in years, that WoW actually felt alive. And yes...I understand that the implementation of it, was skewed and not perfect. However....it was an ATTEMPT by a developer to inject a bit of shock and awe and surprise into the virtual world. In modern day MMOs....even an attempt is better than nothing. But people whine about it so much, I doubt that, at least Blizzard, would try anything remotely similar again. You should have SEEN the forum threads about it....literally hundreds and hundreds of pages of QQ.
Thats the worst part and probably the biggest barrier. For some reason, many MMO players have always wanted an easy, predictable routine. Give them challenging controls or unpredictable encounters (imagine an FPS MMO with good AI) and they'd be gone after a week.
Thats the worst part and probably the biggest barrier. For some reason, many MMO players have always wanted an easy, predictable routine. Give them challenging controls or unpredictable encounters (imagine an FPS MMO with good AI) and they'd be gone after a week.
Yes. Its not that i don't like challenging controls or unpredictable encounters. Its just that when i want that, I play FPS. That sort of play is more suited to a non-network game anyway.
Long games spanning several months if not years aren't suitable for lots of encounters like that. OTOH, 1 or 2 here and there I could see.
But thats not quite the same as MMOs changing. As i said before, you could have parts of the world that change like a switch. From A to B and back again. The world changes more than now. Just not too much, and in a controlled fashion. Any quests you get would be relative to the current state of the game world, and would inevitably involve you effectively flipping that switch.
Thats the worst part and probably the biggest barrier. For some reason, many MMO players have always wanted an easy, predictable routine. Give them challenging controls or unpredictable encounters (imagine an FPS MMO with good AI) and they'd be gone after a week.
Yes. Its not that i don't like challenging controls or unpredictable encounters. Its just that when i want that, I play FPS. That sort of play is more suited to a non-network game anyway.
Long games spanning several months if not years aren't suitable for lots of encounters like that. OTOH, 1 or 2 here and there I could see.
But thats not quite the same as MMOs changing. As i said before, you could have parts of the world that change like a switch. From A to B and back again. The world changes more than now. Just not too much, and in a controlled fashion. Any quests you get would be relative to the current state of the game world, and would inevitably involve you effectively flipping that switch.
Well, isn't that really more about setting expectations and not morphing into a different product mid-stream? I mean you may not like the idea of alot of dynamic content in a MMO...but there are certainly alot of people who do (as evinced by posts here...and frankly other boards as well). If a game came in right up front and said "We do dynamic content all the time....that's a core feature of our game".... I suspect the reaction from most reasonable people would fall into one of 3 catagories:
1) No thanks, that's not really the type of experience I'm interested in, but good luck with your game...I hope your players do enjoy that.
2) Awesome, that's exactly what I've been looking for....I understand there are trade-offs with that and I'm cool with it since I know it up front.
3) Not really sure whether I'll like that or not....but I'm willing to try it....at least I know what type of game I'm getting into.
The real problem probably comes when an established game tries to morph or change thier game play experience mid-stream. For instance if a generaly static game....started throwing in lots of dynamic content.... you'd probably have some people that were happy about it....but others would be furious because it wasn't part of the expectations. Probably the game that will do well with implimenting dynamic content is the one that is designed (and advertised) at the outset with that as a major feature of play.... so the audience of that game knew exactly what to expect and pre-selected themselves based on those preferences. Just like the majority of people that goto a golf match in RL aren't going to complain that there are no fist-fights going on in the match.... They know it's golf, not hockey...no one goes to see golf expecting fist-fights.
Thats the worst part and probably the biggest barrier. For some reason, many MMO players have always wanted an easy, predictable routine. Give them challenging controls or unpredictable encounters (imagine an FPS MMO with good AI) and they'd be gone after a week.
Yes. Its not that i don't like challenging controls or unpredictable encounters. Its just that when i want that, I play FPS. That sort of play is more suited to a non-network game anyway.
Long games spanning several months if not years aren't suitable for lots of encounters like that. OTOH, 1 or 2 here and there I could see.
But thats not quite the same as MMOs changing. As i said before, you could have parts of the world that change like a switch. From A to B and back again. The world changes more than now. Just not too much, and in a controlled fashion. Any quests you get would be relative to the current state of the game world, and would inevitably involve you effectively flipping that switch.
Well, isn't that really more about setting expectations and not morphing into a different product mid-stream? I mean you may not like the idea of alot of dynamic content in a MMO...but there are certainly alot of people who do (as evinced by posts here...and frankly other boards as well). If a game came in right up front and said "We do dynamic content all the time....that's a core feature of our game".... I
Setting expectations is important. OTOH, people know that you have to X amount of things each level and yet they'll still complain about it down the road. Its fine at the beginning, but gets worse as it goes on. Even the player themselves can't judge how they'll react in the long run.
Oh, and i'm ambivalent towards dynamic content. Its trying to turn a rpg into a fps that i don't care for.
Well. In a more positive outlook is that you play with different people and in the social aspect of it all, new things are always happening. The problem is, in order to have personalized or constant/randomized quests, environmental changes, storyline altering from time to time is that it would require a hell of a lot of server maintenance, constant patches and a bigger system requirement on our end. Maybe one day this will all happen as technology in hardware AND gaming advances. Until then. Just be happy that you have MMO's to play period. Otherwise we could all still be pulling out character sheets and rolling die with some cheeto mustached, basement dwelling, overly serious GM. Just saying.
Comments
So let me get this straight... You want a quest to be made unavailable for everyone else, forever, after you complete it, leaving nothing for the player that's walking up behind you, headed toward that NPC you are currently talking to, looking for the quest?
I'm guessing you want them to come up with a random quest generator, that spits out gazillions of quests that are meaningless to any advancement to the storyline, just so that no two people do the same thing?
And as far as killing the same creature over and over... If you have your way with a living persistent world with as many players that will be playing in the same zones day in and day out, then what's going to happen is that zones are going to be completely wiped clean of creatures to kill, and as new players come through those zones for the first time or returning to the zone, there's going to be nothing there for them to hunt.... There has to be a respawn system.
I would think with the intensive programming that I'd imagined it would take to have gazillions of random quests that NEVER spits out the same quest twice, that the time involved in programming that, the game would never release...
I sort of agree. In order to get continuous adventures for everyone. We need an endless supply of missions. You could go the random quest generator, or quests that more or less don't change anything (or not much) visibly.
I call these quests 'single state', because they are in the same state for all time.
I think a good next step would be to have 'double state' quests. In that going the quest changes the world from A to B. But then the next person who gets the quest changes it from B to A. So the world will change, you could go back there and see a difference. But since you are not the only person in the world, it may indeed be changed back by someone elses actions.
You could rescue the princess, but then the next persons quest would be to escort the princess back into the dungeon whereby she later on gets captured again.
So let me get this straight... You want a quest to be made unavailable for everyone else, forever, after you complete it, leaving nothing for the player that's walking up behind you, headed toward that NPC you are currently talking to, looking for the quest?
I'm guessing you want them to come up with a random quest generator, that spits out gazillions of quests that are meaningless to any advancement to the storyline, just so that no two people do the same thing?
And as far as killing the same creature over and over... If you have your way with a living persistent world with as many players that will be playing in the same zones day in and day out, then what's going to happen is that zones are going to be completely wiped clean of creatures to kill, and as new players come through those zones for the first time or returning to the zone, there's going to be nothing there for them to hunt.... There has to be a respawn system.
I would think with the intensive programming that I'd imagined it would take to have gazillions of random quests that NEVER spits out the same quest twice, that the time involved in programming that, the game would never release...
I never said I wanted a quest made unavailable for anyone else. I don't care how many people take on a quest. I said I don't want to see the same NPC standing in the same place handing out the same quest. Do something more realistic! All I care about is that the quest has a unique feel for me. Therefore, decisions,choices and actions I take during the quest change the quest. I want the feeling that because of my game play how the quest unfolds is somewhat unique beyond did I did or did I not kill the beast?
I don't want a random quest generator, but there are choices in between total boring and linear quests and all auto generated. I'm now following the development of a game, Citadel of Sorcery that is doing this very thing. My understanding is that quests are hand written adventures with so much variation based on choice and actions that most players will find a unique path through each quest. That would be excellent.
A living persistent world does not have to pop monster back into existence, and it doesn't have to have areas wiped clean. This is lazy programming. the easy way out. Monsters should act alive, and repopulate an area by moving in, not by popping. Give me some world excuse at least for things, the artificial way in which most MMOs repopulate areas suck.
On your final point we totally agree, which is why you wouldn't make it so that there are gazilions of random quests. (See above).
Wow that's a lot of posts to go through
This is a good subject.
Anyways, I recall an mmo game called Wakfu or something like that a long while back, declaring a dynamic system for their ecosystem in game.
They would have mobs spawning in different zones of the game, and they would have a total population of that species of mob. I remember they said that it is possible to hunt and kill a mob species to extinction. There are also the possibilities for mutations of a species for the mob to change over time into different species altogether.
Now I remember reading that and was impressed with the creativeness and daring (of course there would be idiots trying to hunt every single mob to extinction) plan for their eco system. This was one game where the maker was going to make thing not so static in terms of the mob spawning. Now I never did get into their beta tests due to time and .. well, I had forgotten about it by the time it was released. So if anyone here recognized that name and played it, maybe you can post here and tell me if they did pull it off, that eco system.
It was a highlight, and a real booster for my faith in the future of mmo's. Now, years later, I see more and more of the same thing. The asian mmo's are still cut from the same cookie cutter mold, the other mmo's are all WoW like it's a wonder there haven't been lawsuits.
Sure you have trends of development, like auto-pathing, pets, flying, mounts and instances... but they quickly became gimmicky as everyone and their rivals try to have one of each into their game.
I remember, and with absolute disgust, an mmo that has a built in bot. Hell, if you can't beat the botters and gold farmers, then just outnumber them right? This bot would play the game for you, all the player have to do is enter in a few parameters and leave the game to itself. You come back days later to see what the bot found(all "rare" items of course since you and everyone else can filter it all down to that. Is that still considered rare?) Awesome entertainment right? a game that play itself. I hope this does not become a trend.
Still hoping for changes and bold moves from the game developers, but that hope dwindles. The only one that is going to make big impact is probably if Blizzard declares one day they are going to make something different. They would have the popularity enough to get players to try new things... Like real physics combat instead of select target, press attack and wait for dice rolls for the next minute or two to see the results... *dodges the conservative purists* You will listen of course when someone like Blizzard say its ok! *shakes fist*
(Come on, everyone knows its the same crap every MMO do these days, that is not called combat, thats dice rolling.)
Look, this is all I have to say.
If your MMORPG stays the same every day, you need to find a better group of people to play with.
Check out the MUD I'm making!
http://play.eveonline.com
Actually does the game still looks same, it is people that differs.
Most people would probably have read more than the title before replying BTW, at least OPs full original post as a minimum.
i think so
just the same site with the same games.....but i dont think its too bad.
Hehe I know the feeling bro. I'm former Asheron's Call player.. I have seen no game that is fun as this game. Final Fantasy 11 online is 2nd to me for mmorpg. The reason AC is best for me because it doesnt go same path as everyone.. once you entered the game, your on your own... you wanna do quest, go ahead, you wanna grind? Go ahead... Its not stopping you from going anywhere. Thats what I like about MMORPG. Thats what adventure comes into you because its free world, not following same path as everyone goes through.
Kain_Dale
Actually does the game still looks same, it is people that differs.
Most people would probably have read more than the title before replying BTW, at least OPs full original post as a minimum.
I read the OP's argument. However, how often does life in your town differ? A new restaurant here, a new store there, a mall "update"? Every now and then, you may have a concert "event"? The thing is, the grand adventure in life is seeing new places. What we don't get is that the people in those places all think it stays the same and love it for that.
People expect too much. You can't give anything even close to as grand as life. All you can give people is a world to adventure in and the lore to back it.
You want a grand adventure? Go rid the world of crime. MMOs are made so that everyone can have an adventure in a world that isn't their own. That's not a grand adventure, it's simply high adventure.
It's funny. The people that complain about wanting a grand adventure in an MMO are the same people that complain when an MMO lets everyone feel like a grand hero. Referring to my example above, not everyone can rid the world of crime. In an MMO, if you were to rid the world in that MMO of crime, then wouldn't it be less of an achievement if everyone else could? Wouldn't it feel worthless that that crime came back just to be removed by the next in line?
The thing is, life is mostly static. An MMO is pretty much a life simulator of a life other than your own. It's the people that change things. So here's the moral of my post:
If you want a grand adventure, make a grand adventure. Don't whine to the devs that you can't have a grand adventure in their game. You wouldn't complain to God (or whatever being/force you believe created the universe) that you can't kill some omnipotent evil being would you?
EDIT: Another moral of this post:
Nothing in life would change without a little help from the people in it.
Check out the MUD I'm making!
Topics like this are incredibly easy to talk endlessly about when you're not bound by the realities of budgets, limited resources, profitability, technical capability and on and on.
Plus, the marketplace is fickle. Even on a thread like this which is akin to "the choir", the folks preaching can't get universal agreement on what utopia looks like (even given theoretically unlimited resources) And it goes without saying that no one wants to pay a dime for anything - everyone feels they *already* pay "too much" and that the *current* fees should be providing the huge living utopian world dynamically changing day to day and populated by GMs who are trained actors.
Many on this thread have pointed out EVE and GW2. Wrath of the Lich King has quests which instance the entire overland world. So if I am farther along on a quest than you, Ive transparently moved into a different version of the continent and only players at that stage share it with me. Players on an earlier stage are on an earlier version. But I'm sure thats still not enough and WoW of course sucks as everyone knows
This subject of "why can't we have a completely real living world to escape into?!" has come up since the ancient days of MUDs (and MUDs were actually kind of close to this!) I guess it is just human nature for some to need to live in some manufactured world that is "better" than their real one.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of paying customers really just want a game that provides some fun and entertainment and don't obsess over the fact that their character doesn't have a working digestive system, doesn't need to use the bathroom, doesn't age in real time and isn't living in a world where each NPC is a sentient AI and nothing less than the self direction of these living artificial entities, combined with chaos and chance, drive the "story" forward.
Beyond what GW2, EVE and WoW are currently doing or planning to do, I really don't see how a *game* can do much more and still attract the majority of players. Fact is most people don't want to feel they "missed" anything (the 5 people on this thread say they dont care, but 12,000,000 threads across every game on every site of people bitching they dont get to do ALL of the content for THEIR $12 paint a different reality) The also don't want tremendous complexity or total ambiguity. The majority of paying customers don't want to log into a game that basically doesnt "need" you at all. Thats the whole point behind the type of quest content games use - to make you feel that the world "needs" you. If the world is living and evolving and leaving you *behind* every day you don't play, your character can't be viewed by NPCs as an integral part of the story. None of the "ah! the hero we have been looking for!" They found that hero. Two years before you joined
I think folks who want a total sandbox can find satisfaction (EVE). Obviously folks who like a sort of multi-player version of a single player RPG can find satisfaction (thats most MMOs). Folks who want a persistent FPS with a better rationale for why you're fighting can find satisfaction (DF, etc)
On the other hand, Folks who want the Star Trek holodeck are in for a big disappointment, and folks who basically want a single player MMO where other people are spectators (because, while not in THIS thread, in many threads the "suggestions" for how to "fix" MMOs I see come down to that) are also in for a big disappointment.
Your entire post was fantastic, by the way. I only clipped it to save space.
About this last paragraph....yes....when The Old Republic is released....I'm betting that people will start to see and understand, why Fable was a single player RPG.
If you want REAL adventure and excitement....I think it's going to be a while before we have that intense, vivid experience in an MMO. In the meantime, there ARE ways to have that.....
Real Life Adventure
Silver Lining Tours
Storm Chasing Tours
Oh sure....they may (or may not) be a bit cost prohibitive. I guarantee that they aren't for EVERYONE here. But if you want grand adventure, it comes with SOME sort of price. Even in games, people whine about "risk and reward." So here are three solutions. Choose any of them, or find another. Some people even put their lives up for auction on eBay and will trade lives with you, or just sell you theirs....including their jobs, homes, clothes...you can go REALLY "be someone else." The last story I read where someone did that, the man's name was Ian Usher, of Perth, Australia. I'm sure others will follow suit.
I guess what I'm trying to say here, is that the hunger for adventure that most people have....isn't likely going to be satisfied in an MMO. And it's really asking an awfully lot of developers to give you a new life to live that is as real as the biological one we're living. Seriously. It's like asking them to be gods...all powerful beings that can create universes of such realism and adventure that they can compare to the long evolved life on planet earth and.....be BETTER. That might happen one day, but that kind of universe has to evolve. They're not going to create it overnight. Think about that for a minute.....
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Alot of strawman arguements here, that I see pretty much come down to "Man will never fly"... or perhaps more like, "No one has figured out how to make man fly yet, so everyone should quit trying".
There are two issues at play here....
1) Personal taste. Some people don't like the idea of a dynamic MMO... or possibly the trade-offs that such a game would require. That's perfectly fine, but those people need to realize that those are THEIR personal tastes and not every other person shares them..... no should they expect that EVERY game must cater to those tastes. There is no shortage of MMO's out there.... and that means that there is plenty of room in the market for games that cater to people with different tasts. Just like we accept the fact that some MMO's are PvP oriented and some are PVE, some are Group oriented others solo, some are Fantasy other Sci-Fi..... there is plenty of room for games that cater toward more static minded players and those that cater toward a more dynamic experience.
2) The second is practicalty. The are alot of issues, technical and otherwise that need to be addressed to make games more dynamic. That's ok...nothing worth doing is ever that easy. The nice thing about human beings are that we are very ingenuitive and we figure out new ways to solve problems all the time. Look it was really, really tough to make car's safe and more fuel efficient at the same time....but there have been huge strides made in that area since the 70's. It was really, really tough to for man to figure out how to fly...and there were litteraly thousands of failed attempts before one was successfull.
Making game-worlds more dynamic is hardly rocket-science by comparrison. In fact, alot of games have made small strides in that direction already....and more are in the works (really excited to see how GW2's system turns out). You know the "Star Trek holo-deck" thing would be awesome but I don't think anyone is seriously demanding/expecting that any time soon.
What people are doing/expecting is pressuring Developers to keep pushing the envelope.....and maybe making some suggestions of approaches that might be taken.... honestly there is nothing wrong with that... it's the only way you get better products (in ANY vertical). If customers get complacent or are satisfied with minimal expectations then so do the companies that serve them...... and frankly there ARE alot of developers that are complacent..... that's partly OUR fault for not demanding more from them.
For those of you that aren't fans of dynamic content.....don't freak out...alot of people share your tastes, there WILL be plenty of games out there for you to play....but remember it's a big market....don't try to impose your tastes on every game and every player.
For those of you, like me, who enjoy dynamic content....lets keep up the enthusiam for it.... one thing that spurs companies to make those sort of products is to realize that there is market demand for it. We won't get everything we dream of tomorrow but we don't need that.....all we need is a better offering then we have today. Any improvement we get is a step in the right direction.....and there is plenty of room for improvments (small and large)....and we ARE actually seeing some here and there.
Your entire post was fantastic, by the way. I only clipped it to save space.
About this last paragraph....yes....when The Old Republic is released....I'm betting that people will start to see and understand, why Fable was a single player RPG.
If you want REAL adventure and excitement....I think it's going to be a while before we have that intense, vivid experience in an MMO. In the meantime, there ARE ways to have that.....
Real Life Adventure
Silver Lining Tours
Storm Chasing Tours
Oh sure....they may (or may not) be a bit cost prohibitive. I guarantee that they aren't for EVERYONE here. But if you want grand adventure, it comes with SOME sort of price. Even in games, people whine about "risk and reward." So here are three solutions. Choose any of them, or find another. Some people even put their lives up for auction on eBay and will trade lives with you, or just sell you theirs....including their jobs, homes, clothes...you can go REALLY "be someone else." The last story I read where someone did that, the man's name was Ian Usher, of Perth, Australia. I'm sure others will follow suit.
I guess what I'm trying to say here, is that the hunger for adventure that most people have....isn't likely going to be satisfied in an MMO. And it's really asking an awfully lot of developers to give you a new life to live that is as real as the biological one we're living. Seriously. It's like asking them to be gods...all powerful beings that can create universes of such realism and adventure that they can compare to the long evolved life on planet earth and.....be BETTER. That might happen one day, but that kind of universe has to evolve. They're not going to create it overnight. Think about that for a minute.....
GirlGeek,
I don't think people here are asking for games to take the place of RL adventure..... I've had more then my share of those, including a few that I really don't care to repeat (Try riding through Class 5 white-water OUTSIDE the raft some-time ***shudder***).... Their just asking for a somewhat different game-play experience then what they are being offered today.
Same here. I have other hobbies for adventure and challenge, but that doesn't mean I want a bland game. I can get all the scripted entertainment I want from books and movies.
Same here. I have other hobbies for adventure and challenge, but that doesn't mean I want a bland game. I can get all the scripted entertainment I want from books and movies.
You two are preachin' to the choir here. I am TOTALLY for dynamic content. However....some of us (not all) really ARE asking for a world to escape into that is better than the one we live in. Some peoples' lives really are that desperately sad. Just because yours isn't...certainly doesn't mean that some aren't. I'm not telling you anything here you don't already know either. That's the bunch I was talking to in that post....the ones that really DO want, something better than RL. They won't find it....at least not for a while yet, if ever.
There's also the direct opposite group, who get their panties in a twist when a developer TRIES to add dynamic content and it de-rails their normal daily in game activities. I was the one that posted about loving the scourge invasion in WoW and being so annoyed by the people who got all freaked out about it. It was the first time in years, that WoW actually felt alive. And yes...I understand that the implementation of it, was skewed and not perfect. However....it was an ATTEMPT by a developer to inject a bit of shock and awe and surprise into the virtual world. In modern day MMOs....even an attempt is better than nothing. But people whine about it so much, I doubt that, at least Blizzard, would try anything remotely similar again. You should have SEEN the forum threads about it....literally hundreds and hundreds of pages of QQ.
I look forward to the days of MMOs in the future that will be more of a living, changing, fluid environment. Those days will come. And the people that don't like that dynamic changing world...will always have games to play that don't have it. Like a previous poster said....there's plenty of room in the genre for all of our likes and preferences to be represented. But a game....a game....is never going to be equivalent to real life. The adrenaline rush you get from a massive boss fight, is very different than the one you get when you're standing a mile away from a massive tornado. (Just an example.)
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
GirlGeek,
I don't think people here are asking for games to take the place of RL adventure..... I've had more then my share of those, including a few that I really don't care to repeat (Try riding through Class 5 white-water OUTSIDE the raft some-time ***shudder***).... Their just asking for a somewhat different game-play experience then what they are being offered today.
Oh yes....SOME of them ARE. But most of those people won't be honest about that, because it would imply that their real lives are boring.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Unfortunately, the vast majority of paying customers really just want a game that provides some fun and entertainment and don't obsess over the fact that their character doesn't have a working digestive system, doesn't need to use the bathroom, doesn't age in real time and isn't living in a world where each NPC is a sentient AI and nothing less than the self direction of these living artificial entities, combined with chaos and chance, drive the "story" forward.
Beyond what GW2, EVE and WoW are currently doing or planning to do, I really don't see how a *game* can do much more and still attract the majority of players. Fact is most people don't want to feel they "missed" anything (the 5 people on this thread say they dont care, but 12,000,000 threads across every game on every site of people bitching they dont get to do ALL of the content for THEIR $12 paint a different reality) The also don't want tremendous complexity or total ambiguity. The majority of paying customers don't want to log into a game that basically doesnt "need" you at all. Thats the whole point behind the type of quest content games use - to make you feel that the world "needs" you. If the world is living and evolving and leaving you *behind* every day you don't play, your character can't be viewed by NPCs as an integral part of the story. None of the "ah! the hero we have been looking for!" They found that hero. Two years before you joined
Well said. That is basically the issue. In fact, we have technologies with NPCs having a daily routine back in Ultima 6 days. There is a reason why no games use that anymore. It is frustrating to have to WAIT for NPCs to open their shops. It is bad enough in SP games where you need to hit some key to wait and it will be totally have the player pop in uproar on a MMO.
Thats the worst part and probably the biggest barrier. For some reason, many MMO players have always wanted an easy, predictable routine. Give them challenging controls or unpredictable encounters (imagine an FPS MMO with good AI) and they'd be gone after a week.
Yes. Its not that i don't like challenging controls or unpredictable encounters. Its just that when i want that, I play FPS. That sort of play is more suited to a non-network game anyway.
Long games spanning several months if not years aren't suitable for lots of encounters like that. OTOH, 1 or 2 here and there I could see.
But thats not quite the same as MMOs changing. As i said before, you could have parts of the world that change like a switch. From A to B and back again. The world changes more than now. Just not too much, and in a controlled fashion. Any quests you get would be relative to the current state of the game world, and would inevitably involve you effectively flipping that switch.
Yes. Its not that i don't like challenging controls or unpredictable encounters. Its just that when i want that, I play FPS. That sort of play is more suited to a non-network game anyway.
Long games spanning several months if not years aren't suitable for lots of encounters like that. OTOH, 1 or 2 here and there I could see.
But thats not quite the same as MMOs changing. As i said before, you could have parts of the world that change like a switch. From A to B and back again. The world changes more than now. Just not too much, and in a controlled fashion. Any quests you get would be relative to the current state of the game world, and would inevitably involve you effectively flipping that switch.
Well, isn't that really more about setting expectations and not morphing into a different product mid-stream? I mean you may not like the idea of alot of dynamic content in a MMO...but there are certainly alot of people who do (as evinced by posts here...and frankly other boards as well). If a game came in right up front and said "We do dynamic content all the time....that's a core feature of our game".... I suspect the reaction from most reasonable people would fall into one of 3 catagories:
1) No thanks, that's not really the type of experience I'm interested in, but good luck with your game...I hope your players do enjoy that.
2) Awesome, that's exactly what I've been looking for....I understand there are trade-offs with that and I'm cool with it since I know it up front.
3) Not really sure whether I'll like that or not....but I'm willing to try it....at least I know what type of game I'm getting into.
The real problem probably comes when an established game tries to morph or change thier game play experience mid-stream. For instance if a generaly static game....started throwing in lots of dynamic content.... you'd probably have some people that were happy about it....but others would be furious because it wasn't part of the expectations. Probably the game that will do well with implimenting dynamic content is the one that is designed (and advertised) at the outset with that as a major feature of play.... so the audience of that game knew exactly what to expect and pre-selected themselves based on those preferences. Just like the majority of people that goto a golf match in RL aren't going to complain that there are no fist-fights going on in the match.... They know it's golf, not hockey...no one goes to see golf expecting fist-fights.
Yes. Its not that i don't like challenging controls or unpredictable encounters. Its just that when i want that, I play FPS. That sort of play is more suited to a non-network game anyway.
Long games spanning several months if not years aren't suitable for lots of encounters like that. OTOH, 1 or 2 here and there I could see.
But thats not quite the same as MMOs changing. As i said before, you could have parts of the world that change like a switch. From A to B and back again. The world changes more than now. Just not too much, and in a controlled fashion. Any quests you get would be relative to the current state of the game world, and would inevitably involve you effectively flipping that switch.
Well, isn't that really more about setting expectations and not morphing into a different product mid-stream? I mean you may not like the idea of alot of dynamic content in a MMO...but there are certainly alot of people who do (as evinced by posts here...and frankly other boards as well). If a game came in right up front and said "We do dynamic content all the time....that's a core feature of our game".... I
Setting expectations is important. OTOH, people know that you have to X amount of things each level and yet they'll still complain about it down the road. Its fine at the beginning, but gets worse as it goes on. Even the player themselves can't judge how they'll react in the long run.
Oh, and i'm ambivalent towards dynamic content. Its trying to turn a rpg into a fps that i don't care for.
Well. In a more positive outlook is that you play with different people and in the social aspect of it all, new things are always happening. The problem is, in order to have personalized or constant/randomized quests, environmental changes, storyline altering from time to time is that it would require a hell of a lot of server maintenance, constant patches and a bigger system requirement on our end. Maybe one day this will all happen as technology in hardware AND gaming advances. Until then. Just be happy that you have MMO's to play period. Otherwise we could all still be pulling out character sheets and rolling die with some cheeto mustached, basement dwelling, overly serious GM. Just saying.
Getting too old for this $&17!
I'm tired of MMOs that stay the same every day » Reply
You sir are in luck. The game you seek has not only been invented, it's been out for decades and is highly polished.
Dungeons & Dragons
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren