VR is shit, MR is where it s at, at least I can see my kid choking while playing in MR.
Playing video games in a situation where my son might be choking at any given moment is a life decision I may want to question.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
The closest you'll get is Mixed Reality anytime soon. Overlaying "virtual" scenery over actual real world features. You'll be able to see and hear and smell everything, though you'd likely only be smelling the outdoors or wherever you're actually playing.
Its pretty cool to see current MR devices read surroundings and turn them into geometric shapes to overlay textures, etc.
Granted you'll only have as virtual a world as you'll be in.. but no "true VR" isn't really something you're going to see anytime soon.
nothing more 'immersive' then seeing my washing machine while playing a MR game in which I am on a bridge of a starship!
You won't see your washing machine. That's the point of MR.
actually that is not at all 'the point' of MR. that would be 'the point' of VR not MR.
That said, 100% of your view space would not be filled with fictional reality, in VR it would.
Not true. Also not true. Both things are very much so.. not true. After all this time you still struggle with what MR is.
I know enough about MR to know that 100% of your vision being enveloped in fictional content with not a single pixel being from the physical world is not what make MR different from VR.
I am not sure you do however.
Again, you know little of what MR really is. It very much so can encapsulate every inch of what you see. It's unfortunate that you seem to think otherwise.
It's really the entire point of Mixed Reality. There are a lot of ways to accomplish it.
'can' and 'whats its about' are two very different things.
what is DIFFERENT about MR that leads to the use of the term 'mixed' instead of 'virtual'? what is the 'mixed' term .....'all about'?
MR is 'about' a lot of exciting things, this true, but its not 'all about' the level of fictional immersion that VR is. thus the name....'mixed'. That doesnt mean it cant but it does mean that its 'what its about' either
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
VR is shit, MR is where it s at, at least I can see my kid choking while playing in MR.
from what I have seen MR looks like horseshit but i assume it can or is actually better then what I have seen. What I have directly experience with VR however is extreemly compelling and immerisive.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Why do people on these forums talk as if their "ideas" will save the MMORPG universe in any shape or form? You do realize that the VR market is more niche than niche, if such a thing even exist. Only 0.00001% of the population has a VR headset and most of them barely use it for 2 hours a week, let alone a day. Because of the long exposure dangers of it, and having a damn headset that irritates the hell out of people after 30 minutes, good luck getting a VR MMO, I'm pretty confident some avid fanbois will create such a game, but they better not put their live savings in to creating one, because they won't grab anyone's attention. VR, just like 3D TV / glasses ... remember those from a few years back? It's a phase, and once people start realizing how amazingly stupid they were to have shoved 500 to 900$ on a piece of hardware that you use less often than a 10$ toaster, VR will be dead for the most part. To be fair to you OP, give VR another 20-30 years (IF the concept even lasts that long) to fully develop in to something amazing, as of now, it is just a concept being marketed as finished ... just like MMO's being released in alpha / beta stages but marketed as finished and with a cash shop on top of that to help finance the development of another MMO... phew, almost lost myself there.
Why do people on these forums talk as if their "ideas" will save the MMORPG universe in any shape or form? You do realize that the VR market is more niche than niche, if such a thing even exist. Only 0.00001% of the population has a VR headset and most of them barely use it for 2 hours a week, let alone a day. Because of the long exposure dangers of it, and having a damn headset that irritates the hell out of people after 30 minutes, good luck getting a VR MMO, I'm pretty confident some avid fanbois will create such a game, but they better not put their live savings in to creating one, because they won't grab anyone's attention. VR, just like 3D TV / glasses ... remember those from a few years back? It's a phase, and once people start realizing how amazingly stupid they were to have shoved 500 to 900$ on a piece of hardware that you use less often than a 10$ toaster, VR will be dead for the most part. To be fair to you OP, give VR another 20-30 years (IF the concept even lasts that long) to fully develop in to something amazing, as of now, it is just a concept being marketed as finished ... just like MMO's being released in alpha / beta stages but marketed as finished and with a cash shop on top of that to help finance the development of another MMO... phew, almost lost myself there.
The closest you'll get is Mixed Reality anytime soon. Overlaying "virtual" scenery over actual real world features. You'll be able to see and hear and smell everything, though you'd likely only be smelling the outdoors or wherever you're actually playing.
Its pretty cool to see current MR devices read surroundings and turn them into geometric shapes to overlay textures, etc.
Granted you'll only have as virtual a world as you'll be in.. but no "true VR" isn't really something you're going to see anytime soon.
nothing more 'immersive' then seeing my washing machine while playing a MR game in which I am on a bridge of a starship!
You won't see your washing machine. That's the point of MR.
actually that is not at all 'the point' of MR. that would be 'the point' of VR not MR.
That said, 100% of your view space would not be filled with fictional reality, in VR it would.
Not true. Also not true. Both things are very much so.. not true. After all this time you still struggle with what MR is.
I know enough about MR to know that 100% of your vision being enveloped in fictional content with not a single pixel being from the physical world is not what make MR different from VR.
I am not sure you do however.
Again, you know little of what MR really is. It very much so can encapsulate every inch of what you see. It's unfortunate that you seem to think otherwise.
It's really the entire point of Mixed Reality. There are a lot of ways to accomplish it.
'can' and 'whats its about' are two very different things.
what is DIFFERENT about MR that leads to the use of the term 'mixed' instead of 'virtual'? what is the 'mixed' term .....'all about'?
MR is 'about' a lot of exciting things, this true, but its not 'all about' the level of fictional immersion that VR is. thus the name....'mixed'. That doesnt mean it cant but it does mean that its 'what its about' either
Usually I'd enjoy pushing back with quotes and facts but I don't have the time these days to beat my head against this particular brick wall.
Mixed Reality can overlay itself on any surface utilizing opaque or translucent displays. You could make your couch look like a boat, or create a boat from nothing in your living room. You can reskin every surface in your household to a different texture "pixelating" the entirety of it, or stand stationary with an opaque system and play something exactly like what VR does.
MR systems can encompass properly hardwared VR devices, or equally yet differently hardwared AR devices. Mixed Reality is built more along the lines of the proper software set correlating to the proper peripherals. Much like a tablet without a gsm or comparable radio is only a tablet, but add one and write code for it and it becomes a cell phone.
In the future, less devices are going to be "VR" or "AR" there will undoubtedly be "MR" as more devices.. again, both opaque and translucent, encompass both.
Why do people on these forums talk as if their "ideas" will save the MMORPG universe in any shape or form? You do realize that the VR market is more niche than niche, if such a thing even exist. Only 0.00001% of the population has a VR headset and most of them barely use it for 2 hours a week, let alone a day. Because of the long exposure dangers of it, and having a damn headset that irritates the hell out of people after 30 minutes, good luck getting a VR MMO, I'm pretty confident some avid fanbois will create such a game, but they better not put their live savings in to creating one, because they won't grab anyone's attention. VR, just like 3D TV / glasses ... remember those from a few years back? It's a phase, and once people start realizing how amazingly stupid they were to have shoved 500 to 900$ on a piece of hardware that you use less often than a 10$ toaster, VR will be dead for the most part. To be fair to you OP, give VR another 20-30 years (IF the concept even lasts that long) to fully develop in to something amazing, as of now, it is just a concept being marketed as finished ... just like MMO's being released in alpha / beta stages but marketed as finished and with a cash shop on top of that to help finance the development of another MMO... phew, almost lost myself there.
It already exists. See my signature for details.
If you don't want to take my word for it you can find articles in PC gamer etc. going all the way back to 2013.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
I think the lack of immersion today is mainly a social issue.
*Puts on the rose tinted glasses* 10 years ago, people were quite committed to the MMO of their choice. By "committed" I don't necessarily mean playing one game exclusively, but investing your time without having second thoughts. Even if you were completely new to MMOs, you were at least devoted to exploring what the game has to offer.
Perhaps I too, have changed. I feel a lot less committed to the game worlds I play today. I wouldn't blame it on the game design - I think objectively, the game worlds are brilliantly crafted these days. More often than not, the games also explicitly encourage exploration - something that was not explicitly encouraged in the early MMOs 10 years ago. In my case, it probably comes down to having played too many games. I must have played 200+ MMOs to date. Even if I love a game I pick up, I can't bring myself to fully immerse myself in the game. Not without drawing parallels to the other games I know.
My theory is this:
Today, the MMO population is mainly two-fold. Either it is a seasoned player experienced in the genre (such as me, the OP, or the majority of MMORPG.com users). People like this appreciate roleplay and immersion, but they've also played a good selection of games. It's difficult to fully commit to the new game you pick up. The other part of the MMO audience is the new player. I used to own a Minecraft server and it was an eye-opening experience. Most of the young people know little about roleplaying, story-driven content, open gameplay and immersion in general. They can appreciate it, but they are not educated about it. So both the seasoned and the new players can't really bring themselves to fully embrace the immersion of a game, even if it was there.
Compare this to 15 years ago. Because MMOs were relatively new, there were no expectations. A good number of people were coming to MMOs from table-top games, fantasy books or even dungeons and dragons. I think people were eager to embrace immersion, even if it was delivered to them in a half-arsed way.
The project I'm working with already decided against VR for several reasons.
OP, I hope something does come along so that you get the opportunity to check out the pros and cons for yourself. I feel that that is the only way you're going to know for sure just how impractical VR really is for typical MMORPGs. Who knows, maybe something will come out that actually makes it work decently.
I've got a feevah, and the only prescription... is more cowbell.
Why do people on these forums talk as if their "ideas" will save the MMORPG universe in any shape or form? You do realize that the VR market is more niche than niche, if such a thing even exist. Only 0.00001% of the population has a VR headset and most of them barely use it for 2 hours a week, let alone a day. Because of the long exposure dangers of it, and having a damn headset that irritates the hell out of people after 30 minutes, good luck getting a VR MMO, I'm pretty confident some avid fanbois will create such a game, but they better not put their live savings in to creating one, because they won't grab anyone's attention. VR, just like 3D TV / glasses ... remember those from a few years back? It's a phase, and once people start realizing how amazingly stupid they were to have shoved 500 to 900$ on a piece of hardware that you use less often than a 10$ toaster, VR will be dead for the most part. To be fair to you OP, give VR another 20-30 years (IF the concept even lasts that long) to fully develop in to something amazing, as of now, it is just a concept being marketed as finished ... just like MMO's being released in alpha / beta stages but marketed as finished and with a cash shop on top of that to help finance the development of another MMO... phew, almost lost myself there.
...and another thing: what exactly are "the long exposure dangers of it"?
If it's 'motion sickness', then spare me; I've had my rig since last August and have become acclimated. I can go for hours without any seeming adverse effects?
This may seem like a rhetorical question, but it isn't; perhaps you know something / can cite a source? As far as I know no-one knows yet, so we're just kind of left with this hand-waving? If you have a peer-reviewed article in a medical journal you can link me to I'd greatly appreciate it as I'd like to know if I'm going to keel over for using more than half an hour at a stretch.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Anyone owning a VR headset knows that this is just not true. Being able to turn your head and look behind your back isn't magically providing full immersion into a MMORPG. And VR won't magically remove gear farming which developers use as a method to keep subscribers/customers addicted. Right now you're farming mashing a couple of keys. Then you'll be farming swinging your arms around to hit mobs with your sword. Are you sure it's really that different at the end?
That isn't good enough. I'm talking virtual reality so immersive that you literally feel you are there, so immersive, perhaps, that you can smell the flowers and feel the pain of being hit.
I don't know how old you are, and I won't ask, but I somehow doubt this happens during your actual lifespan... at least not on individual level, playable at home. Let's hope I'm wrong though, I'd love to live that too There's also the question of how much you would enjoy enduring the pain of being hit by a sword or a mace... Maybe you watched too many "Matrix" movies
At this point I just want some degree of immersion. ...
First thing I think of when I read that first line is....'then why do so many people want to play in 3rd person'.
3rd person takes a huge amount away from immersion. that alone can make a huge difference
We do not have true first person. The combat system of Elder Scrolls for example is atrocious. First person as it is presented in MMOs thus far is lackluster. FPS games achieve some meaningful degree of immersion, but I have never felt immersed playing first person in an RPG or MMO.
'true' doesnt matter, its a matter of degree.
On a scale of immersion (100 being most) its like this 1. 3rd person view -100 2. First person View 10 3. VR 100
For those who want an 'immersive' experience and yet in the same breath want 3rd person view in their games are on crack.
I simply don't agree with you. I feel immersed in third person games and first person games. I don't think view has anything to do with it for me, and I cannot be wrong.
I would never play WoW in first person. It looks silly. It's not optimized for such play.
I know your wrong on that front. its not even a matter of debate, just a fact but unfortunately I dont have the time or skill to explain the details. view perspective of your character does make a large impact on immersion
no hes right
i usually feel more immersed in a 3rd person view over a 1st person perspective. sometimes even an isometic view. varies from game to game obviously but hes not wrong
Immersion is completely subjective. What pulls one person into the world may pull another person away from the world. Saying that someone is wrong about what immerses them is is a moronic statement.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
One thing I've always wanted for immersion is to be able to smell the environment. When running through a forest it would be great to smell the forest or the damp of a dungeon.
The other thing is an outfit that vibrated to let you know when you've been hit by a weapon or spell.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Why do people on these forums talk as if their "ideas" will save the MMORPG universe in any shape or form? You do realize that the VR market is more niche than niche, if such a thing even exist. Only 0.00001% of the population has a VR headset and most of them barely use it for 2 hours a week, let alone a day. Because of the long exposure dangers of it, and having a damn headset that irritates the hell out of people after 30 minutes, good luck getting a VR MMO, I'm pretty confident some avid fanbois will create such a game, but they better not put their live savings in to creating one, because they won't grab anyone's attention. VR, just like 3D TV / glasses ... remember those from a few years back? It's a phase, and once people start realizing how amazingly stupid they were to have shoved 500 to 900$ on a piece of hardware that you use less often than a 10$ toaster, VR will be dead for the most part. To be fair to you OP, give VR another 20-30 years (IF the concept even lasts that long) to fully develop in to something amazing, as of now, it is just a concept being marketed as finished ... just like MMO's being released in alpha / beta stages but marketed as finished and with a cash shop on top of that to help finance the development of another MMO... phew, almost lost myself there.
...and another thing: what exactly are "the long exposure dangers of it"?
If it's 'motion sickness', then spare me; I've had my rig since last August and have become acclimated. I can go for hours without any seeming adverse effects?
This may seem like a rhetorical question, but it isn't; perhaps you know something / can cite a source? As far as I know no-one knows yet, so we're just kind of left with this hand-waving? If you have a peer-reviewed article in a medical journal you can link me to I'd greatly appreciate it as I'd like to know if I'm going to keel over for using more than half an hour at a stretch.
I think exclusively focussing your eyes on short-distance objects is not ideal. This is definitely the case with PC screens. I think this is a relatively undisputed fact.
This has to be even worse in VR for two reasons. The screens are much closer to your eyes - I'd imagine this has got to be really bad on your vision in the long term. Second, more importantly, the current generation of VR highly encourages staring at the centre of the screen. The lenses optimise sharpness in the center, while making the edges of the screen generally unusable.
When looking around in the real world, we don't move our sight linearly between things. Our eyes "jump" around the picture and change our focus using what is called "saccades" - sudden changes of focus from one point to another. This is not really possible in VR, as the "picture" is not constantly available to us in its entirety. As such, instead of letting your eyes wander and refocus naturally in big leaps as your head turns, the eyes are encouraged to stay focused on the center of the lens as much as possible. This has got to be unnatural and not ideal in the long term.
That said, will 4 hours of VR a day turn you into a mutant? Probably not. Will it turn your brain into a mush? Also probably not. Will the use of VR over several years have an impact on your vision? Possibly - in a similar fashion to how regular PC monitor use leads to eye strain.
The closest you'll get is Mixed Reality anytime soon. Overlaying "virtual" scenery over actual real world features. You'll be able to see and hear and smell everything, though you'd likely only be smelling the outdoors or wherever you're actually playing.
Its pretty cool to see current MR devices read surroundings and turn them into geometric shapes to overlay textures, etc.
Granted you'll only have as virtual a world as you'll be in.. but no "true VR" isn't really something you're going to see anytime soon.
nothing more 'immersive' then seeing my washing machine while playing a MR game in which I am on a bridge of a starship!
You won't see your washing machine. That's the point of MR.
The closest you'll get is Mixed Reality anytime soon. Overlaying "virtual" scenery over actual real world features. You'll be able to see and hear and smell everything, though you'd likely only be smelling the outdoors or wherever you're actually playing.
Its pretty cool to see current MR devices read surroundings and turn them into geometric shapes to overlay textures, etc.
Granted you'll only have as virtual a world as you'll be in.. but no "true VR" isn't really something you're going to see anytime soon.
nothing more 'immersive' then seeing my washing machine while playing a MR game in which I am on a bridge of a starship!
You won't see your washing machine. That's the point of MR.
The closest you'll get is Mixed Reality anytime soon. Overlaying "virtual" scenery over actual real world features. You'll be able to see and hear and smell everything, though you'd likely only be smelling the outdoors or wherever you're actually playing.
Its pretty cool to see current MR devices read surroundings and turn them into geometric shapes to overlay textures, etc.
Granted you'll only have as virtual a world as you'll be in.. but no "true VR" isn't really something you're going to see anytime soon.
nothing more 'immersive' then seeing my washing machine while playing a MR game in which I am on a bridge of a starship!
You won't see your washing machine. That's the point of MR.
or the oncoming car, or the intruder with the gun to the back of your head. not being totally aware of your surrounds is off putting to the vast majority of people.
problem with both MR and VR when it comes to immersion is that the brain subconsciously knows that something is not right because its ability to gather, process, and store information is waaaay beyond our current level of technology. you can trick the brain on the conscious level but not the subconscious level. an example would be the headaches people get with current VR. simulated 3D depth is still a 3d representation on a 2d plane....and our brains can perceive this(your only tricking the optic nerve and not perfectly at that) and gets confused(because 1) its aware that the reality is virtual and 2) is getting data from other senses. the only ways to have "perfect immersion" would basically be to create a perfect false reality before the brain has a chance to fully develop( essentially tricking all of our senses perfectly before memories can develop) or to damage the brain enough to warp its perceptiveness....either of which shouldn't ethically be done.
I have been immersed in a few of the mmorpgs I've played at times. I was immersed in EQ2 for awhile. But endgame repetition and gear grind totally broke me out of it.
But I believe my level of immersion has been far greater in single player strategy war games where my choices could effect and change the game world. The limitation there is that I'm not sharing that world with anyone else. (I know there are mmo strategy war games, but most of those are pay2win. Also, I would rather control an individual soldier or officer in an army rather than an entire army if I'm playing an mmo.)
All a medieval fantasy mmorpg would have to do to immerse me is to allow me to have the possibility and potential of effecting and changing the game world through my character's words and deeds. Even better if role-playing (in terms of speaking and acting as my characters) was encouraged and incentivized.
Roleplayinn.com - New forum for people who love role-playing of all kinds - tabletop/pencil & paper, live-action, and role-playing in mmorpgs.
The closest you'll get is Mixed Reality anytime soon. Overlaying "virtual" scenery over actual real world features. You'll be able to see and hear and smell everything, though you'd likely only be smelling the outdoors or wherever you're actually playing.
Its pretty cool to see current MR devices read surroundings and turn them into geometric shapes to overlay textures, etc.
Granted you'll only have as virtual a world as you'll be in.. but no "true VR" isn't really something you're going to see anytime soon.
nothing more 'immersive' then seeing my washing machine while playing a MR game in which I am on a bridge of a starship!
You won't see your washing machine. That's the point of MR.
or the oncoming car, or the intruder with the gun to the back of your head. not being totally aware of your surrounds is off putting to the vast majority of people.
problem with both MR and VR when it comes to immersion is that the brain subconsciously knows that something is not right because its ability to gather, process, and store information is waaaay beyond our current level of technology. you can trick the brain on the conscious level but not the subconscious level. an example would be the headaches people get with current VR. simulated 3D depth is still a 3d representation on a 2d plane....and our brains can perceive this(your only tricking the optic nerve and not perfectly at that) and gets confused(because 1) its aware that the reality is virtual and 2) is getting data from other senses. the only ways to have "perfect immersion" would basically be to create a perfect false reality before the brain has a chance to fully develop( essentially tricking all of our senses perfectly before memories can develop) or to damage the brain enough to warp its perceptiveness....either of which shouldn't ethically be done.
Exactly. There is a lot more to simulating reality than visuals. There are all the other sensory cues missing from a technology that focuses on visuals and to a lesser extent positional audio simulation.
It's no different really than first person vs. 3rd person playing without VR doodahs: 3rd person view is a lesser visual simulation but it provides much better situational awareness precisely by giving you an unrealistic viewpoint that does a better job of compensating for the missing sensory data.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I can be totally immersed in movies and television shows without VR. I can even be immersed in novels or comic books. My imagination and emotions can make up for whatever is lacking in physical stimulation.
Also, I think global and zone chat is another thing that breaks immersion. Especially when people get bored and start talking about real world things. But if people are talking about real world things in an mmorpg, that is probably or usually because the game is not doing a good job of immersing them in its world. Still, more realistic communication and more realism in general would also help to immerse us more in mmorpgs. Imho.
Roleplayinn.com - New forum for people who love role-playing of all kinds - tabletop/pencil & paper, live-action, and role-playing in mmorpgs.
Themepark = Paint-by-the-numbers and paint a limited number of things
Sandbox = Give me the tools and let me paint what I want (Or course it would still be limited because we don't have the technology to create a virtual world with all the possibilities of the real world, but it would be far less limited than in a thempark.) Fair and competitive PVP is required to make a sandbox really come alive though. A solely PVE sandbox is far more limited than a PVP/PVE sandbox. I don't want PVP because I enjoy killing people's characters, I want PVP because it increases the number of choices and possibilities within a virtual world.
Really, I wouldn't mind if I never accomplished any of my goals and failed at everything I set out to do in an mmorpg (because other players got in my way or stopped me). I would prefer that to being able to accomplish whatever I want within the limited framework as long as I have patience and follow the prescribed method.
Also, we need the prices of personal computers to decrease. When most people have powerful home computers with 16GB of RAM, games can become far more complex with better graphics.
Instances also break immersion. I really enjoyed the persistent dungeons in EQ2. They can become overcrowded, but there could be ways to encourage people to group with whoever shows up while they're in there. And in a sandbox with good and evil alignments, racial hatreds, national enmities, and full loot PVP, things could really become interesting in those types of dungeons.
Why is most everything magical or supernatural beneficial in most mmorpgs these days? In single player rpgs I played as a kid, I could find a cursed sword that actually gave me minus to attack. And I couldn't get rid of that cursed weapon without aid from a spell or a priest. There can also be magical items that cause other physical ailments or cause a character to become possessed or otherwise under the control or domination by a deity, devil, demon, or other supernatural entity. Magic isn't necessarily safe and helpful in all cases.
One potential problem with a pvp sandbox is that one realm or faction may eventually grow to completely dominate the game world. However, after giving a certain player faction enough time to bask in their victory, developers and GMs have many tools at their disposal to deal with such a possibility. Deities can intervene, famine, plague, or natural disasters could strike, invaders could arrive from across the sea, or a monstrous horde could emerge from the underworld. If it was an mmorpg that involved space warfare, an alien armada could invade the solar system or galaxy.
Post edited by Brald_Ironheart on
Roleplayinn.com - New forum for people who love role-playing of all kinds - tabletop/pencil & paper, live-action, and role-playing in mmorpgs.
Because Johnny No Life, way more powerful than you, repeatedly killing you and camping your corpse, adds a lot of immersion to a game.
I agree that is a problem in a lot pvp games. However, there are ways to deal with it. For one thing, I would greatly reduce the power gap between new and veteran players in a pvp mmorpg. The amount of benefit one could gain from gear would be more limited and realistic. Losing gear would not be so much of a punishment as replacing it would be much easier than in games based on EQ and WoW. Character/experience and gear levels would not be the main method of progression. I would actually get rid of experience levels altogether. Some skill progression, but limited. Also, I think any game that allows for murder, robbery, or any crime committed against another player character needs laws and potential punishments to exist for those who are caught. Though some zones or realms in the game might be less lawful than others.
As being able to kill someone else more than once is not realistic anyway, both or all players involved in such an encounter could be restricted from engaging each other again for a certain amount of time.
And progression could also be more related to the political, social and economic status a player's character might gain or lose through choices they and other players make. Gaining or losing territory and resources are other significant ways for realms or factions to progress or regress.
Post edited by Brald_Ironheart on
Roleplayinn.com - New forum for people who love role-playing of all kinds - tabletop/pencil & paper, live-action, and role-playing in mmorpgs.
Could also try having different servers with different rulesets. One with no loot PVP, one with partial loot, and one with full loot. And don't charge for switching servers if players want to try something different.
Of course, the problem there is that a player would lose their progress on the other server in terms of cooperating and/or competing to achieve goals and progress in the world, so it would probably be better if they just had a character slot available on each server with different rulesets.
Roleplayinn.com - New forum for people who love role-playing of all kinds - tabletop/pencil & paper, live-action, and role-playing in mmorpgs.
People are automatically formed into groups and eventually a raid group* if they show up separately? Though people of conflicting alignments or warring factions could choose to either truce temporarily or decline joining.
As more people enter the dungeon, more mobs start appearing, mobs respawn faster, more mini-bosses appear, and either the boss of the dungeon becomes more powerful or an even more powerful boss appears. More gear drops and the drop rate of rare gear or items increases. Is that feasible?
*greed-only, but classes would have a better chance of receiving class-specific gear
Post edited by Brald_Ironheart on
Roleplayinn.com - New forum for people who love role-playing of all kinds - tabletop/pencil & paper, live-action, and role-playing in mmorpgs.
i usually feel more immersed in a 3rd person view over a 1st person perspective. sometimes even an isometic view. varies from game to game obviously but hes not wrong
no he is not saying that, he is saying one is not more than the other, you are claiming something new that is he is not claiming.
and I dont agree with your new claim either.
In the strick definition of the word immersion yes even stacking sticks together in real life can be 'immersion' but I am using it in the content not of mental involvement to the point where nothing else matters but rather in a sense that your interaction feels as if its more real then not real.
So the question becomes this, if stacking a pile of sticks can be just as immersive as 3rd person or 1st person view how are we making the point that on average VR can be more immersive then 3rd person or 1st person.
If you discount that view is not important to immersion its hard to then turn around in the very same point and then suggest that view IS important to immersion.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I'm comfortable with 3rd person perspective in mmorpgs. I'm not playing as myself. I'm playing as a character in a virtual world. I don't really like VR, and I don't need it. Not really thrilled about the idea of AI becoming advanced enough to mimic human behavior either.
Roleplayinn.com - New forum for people who love role-playing of all kinds - tabletop/pencil & paper, live-action, and role-playing in mmorpgs.
Comments
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
what is DIFFERENT about MR that leads to the use of the term 'mixed' instead of 'virtual'? what is the 'mixed' term .....'all about'?
MR is 'about' a lot of exciting things, this true, but its not 'all about' the level of fictional immersion that VR is. thus the name....'mixed'. That doesnt mean it cant but it does mean that its 'what its about' either
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
What I have directly experience with VR however is extreemly compelling and immerisive.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
https://www.polygon.com/virtual-reality/2017/2/10/14580932/valve-is-working-on-three-full-vr-games
in a few years you might have to eat on those words
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Mixed Reality can overlay itself on any surface utilizing opaque or translucent displays. You could make your couch look like a boat, or create a boat from nothing in your living room. You can reskin every surface in your household to a different texture "pixelating" the entirety of it, or stand stationary with an opaque system and play something exactly like what VR does.
MR systems can encompass properly hardwared VR devices, or equally yet differently hardwared AR devices. Mixed Reality is built more along the lines of the proper software set correlating to the proper peripherals. Much like a tablet without a gsm or comparable radio is only a tablet, but add one and write code for it and it becomes a cell phone.
In the future, less devices are going to be "VR" or "AR" there will undoubtedly be "MR" as more devices.. again, both opaque and translucent, encompass both.
If you don't want to take my word for it you can find articles in PC gamer etc. going all the way back to 2013.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
*Puts on the rose tinted glasses* 10 years ago, people were quite committed to the MMO of their choice. By "committed" I don't necessarily mean playing one game exclusively, but investing your time without having second thoughts. Even if you were completely new to MMOs, you were at least devoted to exploring what the game has to offer.
Perhaps I too, have changed. I feel a lot less committed to the game worlds I play today. I wouldn't blame it on the game design - I think objectively, the game worlds are brilliantly crafted these days. More often than not, the games also explicitly encourage exploration - something that was not explicitly encouraged in the early MMOs 10 years ago. In my case, it probably comes down to having played too many games. I must have played 200+ MMOs to date. Even if I love a game I pick up, I can't bring myself to fully immerse myself in the game. Not without drawing parallels to the other games I know.
My theory is this:
Today, the MMO population is mainly two-fold. Either it is a seasoned player experienced in the genre (such as me, the OP, or the majority of MMORPG.com users). People like this appreciate roleplay and immersion, but they've also played a good selection of games. It's difficult to fully commit to the new game you pick up. The other part of the MMO audience is the new player. I used to own a Minecraft server and it was an eye-opening experience. Most of the young people know little about roleplaying, story-driven content, open gameplay and immersion in general. They can appreciate it, but they are not educated about it. So both the seasoned and the new players can't really bring themselves to fully embrace the immersion of a game, even if it was there.
Compare this to 15 years ago. Because MMOs were relatively new, there were no expectations. A good number of people were coming to MMOs from table-top games, fantasy books or even dungeons and dragons. I think people were eager to embrace immersion, even if it was delivered to them in a half-arsed way.
The project I'm working with already decided against VR for several reasons.
OP, I hope something does come along so that you get the opportunity to check out the pros and cons for yourself. I feel that that is the only way you're going to know for sure just how impractical VR really is for typical MMORPGs. Who knows, maybe something will come out that actually makes it work decently.
I've got a feevah, and the only prescription... is more cowbell.
If it's 'motion sickness', then spare me; I've had my rig since last August and have become acclimated. I can go for hours without any seeming adverse effects?
This may seem like a rhetorical question, but it isn't; perhaps you know something / can cite a source? As far as I know no-one knows yet, so we're just kind of left with this hand-waving? If you have a peer-reviewed article in a medical journal you can link me to I'd greatly appreciate it as I'd like to know if I'm going to keel over for using more than half an hour at a stretch.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
i usually feel more immersed in a 3rd person view over a 1st person perspective. sometimes even an isometic view. varies from game to game obviously but hes not wrong
The other thing is an outfit that vibrated to let you know when you've been hit by a weapon or spell.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
This has to be even worse in VR for two reasons. The screens are much closer to your eyes - I'd imagine this has got to be really bad on your vision in the long term. Second, more importantly, the current generation of VR highly encourages staring at the centre of the screen. The lenses optimise sharpness in the center, while making the edges of the screen generally unusable.
When looking around in the real world, we don't move our sight linearly between things. Our eyes "jump" around the picture and change our focus using what is called "saccades" - sudden changes of focus from one point to another. This is not really possible in VR, as the "picture" is not constantly available to us in its entirety. As such, instead of letting your eyes wander and refocus naturally in big leaps as your head turns, the eyes are encouraged to stay focused on the center of the lens as much as possible. This has got to be unnatural and not ideal in the long term.
That said, will 4 hours of VR a day turn you into a mutant? Probably not. Will it turn your brain into a mush? Also probably not. Will the use of VR over several years have an impact on your vision? Possibly - in a similar fashion to how regular PC monitor use leads to eye strain.
problem with both MR and VR when it comes to immersion is that the brain subconsciously knows that something is not right because its ability to gather, process, and store information is waaaay beyond our current level of technology. you can trick the brain on the conscious level but not the subconscious level. an example would be the headaches people get with current VR. simulated 3D depth is still a 3d representation on a 2d plane....and our brains can perceive this(your only tricking the optic nerve and not perfectly at that) and gets confused(because 1) its aware that the reality is virtual and 2) is getting data from other senses. the only ways to have "perfect immersion" would basically be to create a perfect false reality before the brain has a chance to fully develop( essentially tricking all of our senses perfectly before memories can develop) or to damage the brain enough to warp its perceptiveness....either of which shouldn't ethically be done.
But I believe my level of immersion has been far greater in single player strategy war games where my choices could effect and change the game world. The limitation there is that I'm not sharing that world with anyone else. (I know there are mmo strategy war games, but most of those are pay2win. Also, I would rather control an individual soldier or officer in an army rather than an entire army if I'm playing an mmo.)
All a medieval fantasy mmorpg would have to do to immerse me is to allow me to have the possibility and potential of effecting and changing the game world through my character's words and deeds. Even better if role-playing (in terms of speaking and acting as my characters) was encouraged and incentivized.
It's no different really than first person vs. 3rd person playing without VR doodahs: 3rd person view is a lesser visual simulation but it provides much better situational awareness precisely by giving you an unrealistic viewpoint that does a better job of compensating for the missing sensory data.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Also, I think global and zone chat is another thing that breaks immersion. Especially when people get bored and start talking about real world things. But if people are talking about real world things in an mmorpg, that is probably or usually because the game is not doing a good job of immersing them in its world. Still, more realistic communication and more realism in general would also help to immerse us more in mmorpgs. Imho.
Sandbox = Give me the tools and let me paint what I want (Or course it would still be limited because we don't have the technology to create a virtual world with all the possibilities of the real world, but it would be far less limited than in a thempark.) Fair and competitive PVP is required to make a sandbox really come alive though. A solely PVE sandbox is far more limited than a PVP/PVE sandbox. I don't want PVP because I enjoy killing people's characters, I want PVP because it increases the number of choices and possibilities within a virtual world.
Really, I wouldn't mind if I never accomplished any of my goals and failed at everything I set out to do in an mmorpg (because other players got in my way or stopped me). I would prefer that to being able to accomplish whatever I want within the limited framework as long as I have patience and follow the prescribed method.
Also, we need the prices of personal computers to decrease. When most people have powerful home computers with 16GB of RAM, games can become far more complex with better graphics.
Instances also break immersion. I really enjoyed the persistent dungeons in EQ2. They can become overcrowded, but there could be ways to encourage people to group with whoever shows up while they're in there. And in a sandbox with good and evil alignments, racial hatreds, national enmities, and full loot PVP, things could really become interesting in those types of dungeons.
Why is most everything magical or supernatural beneficial in most mmorpgs these days? In single player rpgs I played as a kid, I could find a cursed sword that actually gave me minus to attack. And I couldn't get rid of that cursed weapon without aid from a spell or a priest. There can also be magical items that cause other physical ailments or cause a character to become possessed or otherwise under the control or domination by a deity, devil, demon, or other supernatural entity. Magic isn't necessarily safe and helpful in all cases.
One potential problem with a pvp sandbox is that one realm or faction may eventually grow to completely dominate the game world. However, after giving a certain player faction enough time to bask in their victory, developers and GMs have many tools at their disposal to deal with such a possibility. Deities can intervene, famine, plague, or natural disasters could strike, invaders could arrive from across the sea, or a monstrous horde could emerge from the underworld. If it was an mmorpg that involved space warfare, an alien armada could invade the solar system or galaxy.
As being able to kill someone else more than once is not realistic anyway, both or all players involved in such an encounter could be restricted from engaging each other again for a certain amount of time.
And progression could also be more related to the political, social and economic status a player's character might gain or lose through choices they and other players make. Gaining or losing territory and resources are other significant ways for realms or factions to progress or regress.
Of course, the problem there is that a player would lose their progress on the other server in terms of cooperating and/or competing to achieve goals and progress in the world, so it would probably be better if they just had a character slot available on each server with different rulesets.
People are automatically formed into groups and eventually a raid group* if they show up separately? Though people of conflicting alignments or warring factions could choose to either truce temporarily or decline joining.
As more people enter the dungeon, more mobs start appearing, mobs respawn faster, more mini-bosses appear, and either the boss of the dungeon becomes more powerful or an even more powerful boss appears. More gear drops and the drop rate of rare gear or items increases. Is that feasible?
*greed-only, but classes would have a better chance of receiving class-specific gear
and I dont agree with your new claim either.
In the strick definition of the word immersion yes even stacking sticks together in real life can be 'immersion' but I am using it in the content not of mental involvement to the point where nothing else matters but rather in a sense that your interaction feels as if its more real then not real.
So the question becomes this, if stacking a pile of sticks can be just as immersive as 3rd person or 1st person view how are we making the point that on average VR can be more immersive then 3rd person or 1st person.
If you discount that view is not important to immersion its hard to then turn around in the very same point and then suggest that view IS important to immersion.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me