Originally posted by Matticus75 Here is food for thought, why are the AI in the last 2 or so years not any better than AI was pretty much from the 1990s
AI is extremely resource intensive. It can be done, but it's not possible in all hardware situations. Also, there can be other problems: In early builds of the game Stalker, the AI was so good that NPCs would complete the game's goals well before your player could.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Dynamic events would be player driven if the reigns of control were properly handed over to players.
There really are currently no paths to real and lasting glory in MMOs. The closest thing is bragging rights, pvp or pve content. worldwide 1st etc.
You can't become a worshipable god, eradicate a race, or force players to pay you taxes. You cant control transportation, communication, or politics.
It wouldnt take much power to be up for grabs for massive player driven content and drama to unfold.
The key would be designing it in such a way that it had the right permanence and elusiveness, and that exercising this great power in socially responsible ways was in the best interest of the wielder(atleast for SOME of the larger-than-life arch-roles--you have to have bad guys too).
That is why political leadership and power would lend itself so well. If players could vote out a bad President than whoever won the election would tend to seek their interest.
IMO the biggest mistake the MMO industry made was nerfing player driven experience. Scammers, nuisances, and others should have been punished via in-game means such as letting community retaliate thru a game-mediated response. Instead MMOs took the weak way out and tried to prevent negative online interaction altogether.
Humans are flawed creatures. MOST of their interaction is flawed.
Interaction is the whole point to making an RPG "massively multiplayer".
And if 1 player city had a bad king...the other players would try to escape his city and move to a city ruled by a king that ran things more optimally.
In the effort to eliminate negative meaningfulness...they destroyed positive meaningfulness. Without pain there can be no pleasure. There is no relative difference in how things operate when all bad experience is removed. Relative difference is the spice of life. You need bad to even recognize the rest is good.
Which is why the majority of the industry's design is viewed as flavorless, even with amazing graphics and backstories.
I always laugh when I hear a guild recruiting "drama free guild". Nobody actually wants that. Ppl like life to be interesting. What recruiters really mean is progression focused...cuz EVERYONE is imperfect and has flawed interpersonal orientations. Their opinion of themselves that they are "drama free" is ignorant hypocrisy, a drama in-and-of itself. Makes for a great storyline to know you joined a guild full of selfrighteous hypocrites! Just dont point it out to them unless you are looking for confrontation lol. You can be sure they will tell the world you brought "drama" into their guild that wasnt there before.
I shall always remember the fight in Steel Canyon, end of CoH beta (I think I will always remember, assuming no mental reduction in my later years), even if I can't find the #$@!#$@#$ screenshot folder I had from that day!
Dynamic events would be player driven if the reigns of control were properly handed over to players.
There really are currently no paths to real and lasting glory in MMOs. The closest thing is bragging rights, pvp or pve content. worldwide 1st etc.
You can't become a worshipable god, eradicate a race, or force players to pay you taxes. You cant control transportation, communication, or politics.
It wouldnt take much power to be up for grabs for massive player driven content and drama to unfold.
The key would be designing it in such a way that it had the right permanence and elusiveness, and that exercising this great power in socially responsible ways was in the best interest of the wielder(atleast for SOME of the larger-than-life arch-roles--you have to have bad guys too).
That is why political leadership and power would lend itself so well. If players could vote out a bad President than whoever won the election would tend to seek their interest.
IMO the biggest mistake the MMO industry made was nerfing player driven experience. Scammers, nuisances, and others should have been punished via in-game means such as letting community retaliate thru a game-mediated response. Instead MMOs took the weak way out and tried to prevent negative online interaction altogether.
Humans are flawed creatures. MOST of their interaction is flawed.
Interaction is the whole point to making an RPG "massively multiplayer".
And if 1 player city had a bad king...the other players would try to escape his city and move to a city ruled by a king that ran things more optimally.
In the effort to eliminate negative meaningfulness...they destroyed positive meaningfulness. Without pain there can be no pleasure. There is no relative difference in how things operate when all bad experience is removed. Relative difference is the spice of life. You need bad to even recognize the rest is good.
Which is why the majority of the industry's design is viewed as flavorless, even with amazing graphics and backstories.
I always laugh when I hear a guild recruiting "drama free guild". Nobody actually wants that. Ppl like life to be interesting. What recruiters really mean is progression focused...cuz EVERYONE is imperfect and has flawed interpersonal orientations. Their opinion of themselves that they are "drama free" is ignorant hypocrisy, a drama in-and-of itself. Makes for a great storyline to know you joined a guild full of selfrighteous hypocrites! Just dont point it out to them unless you are looking for confrontation lol. You can be sure they will tell the world you brought "drama" into their guild that wasnt there before.
Very interesting. And you're right, in a sense they've removed the humanity from these games. No wonder people play them solo.
AoW has all day, daily, weekend, and weekly events.. All dynamic because they are player driven. Random vendors, gossip "miricle" events, that happen from unmarked npc, all types of stuff.
The ONLY way events can be random is if they are player generated.
As a player, I was never a fan of dynamics events.
They just seemed so absurd and a waste of time. The only event I enjoyed and participated in COH was the Praetorian Invasion and that was because I wanted to do combat against the Praetorian NPCs. Unfortunately, they were so powerful it was almost laughable trying to take them down. Lag was a big problem too. I was never able to go one-on-one with Tyrant either.
The random events for badges I didn't participate in either. I think trying to find people to play was the hardest part. Most of the players had no idea about the events either.
From the developer perspective, were they successful? Why did you decide on these instead of the tradtional content ways? Were these easier to create for players?
Comments
AI is extremely resource intensive. It can be done, but it's not possible in all hardware situations. Also, there can be other problems: In early builds of the game Stalker, the AI was so good that NPCs would complete the game's goals well before your player could.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Dynamic events would be player driven if the reigns of control were properly handed over to players.
There really are currently no paths to real and lasting glory in MMOs. The closest thing is bragging rights, pvp or pve content. worldwide 1st etc.
You can't become a worshipable god, eradicate a race, or force players to pay you taxes. You cant control transportation, communication, or politics.
It wouldnt take much power to be up for grabs for massive player driven content and drama to unfold.
The key would be designing it in such a way that it had the right permanence and elusiveness, and that exercising this great power in socially responsible ways was in the best interest of the wielder(atleast for SOME of the larger-than-life arch-roles--you have to have bad guys too).
That is why political leadership and power would lend itself so well. If players could vote out a bad President than whoever won the election would tend to seek their interest.
IMO the biggest mistake the MMO industry made was nerfing player driven experience. Scammers, nuisances, and others should have been punished via in-game means such as letting community retaliate thru a game-mediated response. Instead MMOs took the weak way out and tried to prevent negative online interaction altogether.
Humans are flawed creatures. MOST of their interaction is flawed.
Interaction is the whole point to making an RPG "massively multiplayer".
And if 1 player city had a bad king...the other players would try to escape his city and move to a city ruled by a king that ran things more optimally.
In the effort to eliminate negative meaningfulness...they destroyed positive meaningfulness. Without pain there can be no pleasure. There is no relative difference in how things operate when all bad experience is removed. Relative difference is the spice of life. You need bad to even recognize the rest is good.
Which is why the majority of the industry's design is viewed as flavorless, even with amazing graphics and backstories.
I always laugh when I hear a guild recruiting "drama free guild". Nobody actually wants that. Ppl like life to be interesting. What recruiters really mean is progression focused...cuz EVERYONE is imperfect and has flawed interpersonal orientations. Their opinion of themselves that they are "drama free" is ignorant hypocrisy, a drama in-and-of itself. Makes for a great storyline to know you joined a guild full of selfrighteous hypocrites! Just dont point it out to them unless you are looking for confrontation lol. You can be sure they will tell the world you brought "drama" into their guild that wasnt there before.
Aloha Mr Hand !
Thanks again, Pos.
I shall always remember the fight in Steel Canyon, end of CoH beta (I think I will always remember, assuming no mental reduction in my later years), even if I can't find the #$@!#$@#$ screenshot folder I had from that day!
Very interesting. And you're right, in a sense they've removed the humanity from these games. No wonder people play them solo.
Once upon a time....
Don't hate me..
AoW has all day, daily, weekend, and weekly events.. All dynamic because they are player driven. Random vendors, gossip "miricle" events, that happen from unmarked npc, all types of stuff.
The ONLY way events can be random is if they are player generated.
As a player, I was never a fan of dynamics events.
They just seemed so absurd and a waste of time. The only event I enjoyed and participated in COH was the Praetorian Invasion and that was because I wanted to do combat against the Praetorian NPCs. Unfortunately, they were so powerful it was almost laughable trying to take them down. Lag was a big problem too. I was never able to go one-on-one with Tyrant either.
The random events for badges I didn't participate in either. I think trying to find people to play was the hardest part. Most of the players had no idea about the events either.
From the developer perspective, were they successful? Why did you decide on these instead of the tradtional content ways? Were these easier to create for players?