Map spawn vs Spot Spawn

iixviiiix

For example

Map spawn : map 1 spawn fixed number of monsters A B C D , those monster go wandering around the map

VS

Spot spawn : typical theme park MMORPG , 1 type of monster spawn at a spot , wandering around that spot , then run back when they travel too far away from their spot and get full heal back .

Personally , i prefer map spawn because there are many way to toy with the mob . Sadly , all modern WOW clone i know was using spot spawn .

Amaranthar

Map spawn and wandering. But I'd like to see that enhanced, I mean it's not that simple to begin with and it can be built upon to make a very interesting world to adventure in. 

- MOB "wants and goals", for example, leading them in search of a place to call home, joining up with like MOBs, seeking food and gold, etc. 

- Mob building, nests to forts. Dungeon takeovers. 

Ridelynn

I can remember all the reasons why games shifted over to "spot spawn". It was a stop gap to prevent griefing and exploits.

The real answer is better AI, @Amaranthar is correct. But we aren't quite there yet. It was the one thing I was pretty hyped about coming from EQ Next (StoryBrick et al).

cameltosis

I don't really care where they spawn, what's more important is how they act when they spawn.

For example, if there is an orc camp on the map, I would expect new orcs to spawn within the camp, but ideally I'd then like them to be assigned to various spots around the camp, maybe assigned to a proper patrol or a raiding group. If the assignments of the new spawns are reactions to the world around them, then even better (e.g. if the orcs have a good population, then maybe more raiding groups are created to get supplies, but if the orcs are under pressure, maybe a bigger percentage get assigned to guard duty).

Iselin

Ridelynn said:

I can remember all the reasons why games shifted over to "spot spawn". It was a stop gap to prevent griefing and exploits.

The real answer is better AI, @Amaranthar is correct. But we aren't quite there yet. It was the one thing I was pretty hyped about coming from EQ Next (StoryBrick et al).

That was the part of EQN that really interested me too. 

Amaranthar

cameltosis said:

I don't really care where they spawn, what's more important is how they act when they spawn.

For example, if there is an orc camp on the map, I would expect new orcs to spawn within the camp, but ideally I'd then like them to be assigned to various spots around the camp, maybe assigned to a proper patrol or a raiding group. If the assignments of the new spawns are reactions to the world around them, then even better (e.g. if the orcs have a good population, then maybe more raiding groups are created to get supplies, but if the orcs are under pressure, maybe a bigger percentage get assigned to guard duty).

Years ago on this subject, I posted this under one of Raph Koster's blogs:
"Think "ants"." 

Ant colonies have guards, workers, and they go out and forage food. They leave some sort of scent for other ants to follow to a source of food. 

Is it a stretch to think that Orcs might take over a cave as "home base"? 
How about foraging/hunting for food?
Is it then a stretch for them to gather building supplies? 
And then build a fortified wall around that cave entrance? Towers? 

And in their foraging, if they get too close to a rich supply, say a human village, what happens then?
That's where the AI system I've talked about, based on random but weighted rolls for actions, come in. They may or may not attack the human village. If they are really hungry they are more likely to raid the village. If they are outnumbered and take a beating, driven back, they are less likely to try it again. 

Meanwhile, the players may discover their base, and attack it to clear them away, or be defeated by defenses (built from foraging)...stalemate, for the time being. 

That's a simulated world in the making. 
Add GMs to the equation and things can get really interesting. 
If you got them, Player's playing evil, such as Ancient_Exile's ideas, might work really well together with this too, if it can be designed without allowing rampant PKing. 

That player Dragon, of huge and ancient power, might be watching from far overhead with interest in those tasty cattle. 

Vrika

I prefer spot spawn.

Mobs that are stupidly scattered around the map just create stupid situations. Mobs should act a bit more intelligently, not a bit more stupider.

Scorchien

23 years later UOs spawn system is still superior to all others ..

ChildoftheShadows

I like the idea of mob spawns being randomly placed, but not just the mobs themselves unless they are typical animal types which are found seemingly roaming anyway. I imagine orc camps appearing within orc territories and workers assembling, gatherers gathering. The longer it's there the more they spread. When players find it if they manage to wipe it out then it will simply respawn somewhere else as a different group. I believe SWG had a similar system for some of their spawn camps.

Ancient_Exile

ChildoftheShadows said:

I like the idea of mob spawns being randomly placed, but not just the mobs themselves unless they are typical animal types which are found seemingly roaming anyway. I imagine orc camps appearing within orc territories and workers assembling, gatherers gathering. The longer it's there the more they spread. When players find it if they manage to wipe it out then it will simply respawn somewhere else as a different group. I believe SWG had a similar system for some of their spawn camps.

Make Mob tribes like Factions in RTS games basically.

Ancient_Exile

Scorchien said:

23 years later UOs spawn system is still superior to all others ..

How did UO's spawn system work?

Scorchien

Well , to keep it simple

  ex.. in E Brit Woods .. Lizardman camps can spawn .. and its not static they can spwn anywhere in that area and then will roam , same with Trolls ,Ettins , Air Ellys, Gargoyle etc..  The same applys to all wildlife , if you want hunt deer for hides ... they will not be in the same spot every time ..

  So walking into E Brit woods is never the same ..

  Not to mention Treasure Hunts gone bad .. you can walk into that same area and find Dread Spiders and Lich Lords that are roaming .. who will kill you and loot your corpse ..

  So much fuggin Fun

   Dungeon Destard , primary Dragon spawn ... you can be in there farming and Dragons do not spawn staticly they can spawn anywhere in the dungeon and will roam , you could be fighting a Dragon and a Greater Dragon can spawn in your back pocket..

  Keeps you on your toes and makes combat exciting and fun ..

    couple examples..

 very immersive to have to pay attention even in a starter area as a 7x .. or you will be dead ..

Ancient_Exile

Scorchien said:

Well , to keep it simple

  ex.. in E Brit Woods .. Lizardman camps can spawn .. and its not static they can spwn anywhere in that area and then will roam , same with Trolls ,Ettins , Air Ellys, Gargoyle etc..  The same applys to all wildlife , if you want hunt deer for hides ... they will not be in the same spot every time ..

  So walking into E Brit woods is never the same ..

  Not to mention Treasure Hunts gone bad .. you can walk into that same area and find Dread Spiders and Lich Lords that are roaming .. who will kill you and loot your corpse ..

  So much fuggin Fun

   Dungeon Destard , primary Dragon spawn ... you can be in there farming and Dragons do not spawn staticly they can spawn anywhere in the dungeon and will roam , you could be fighting a Dragon and a Greater Dragon can spawn in your back pocket..

  Keeps you on your toes and makes combat exciting and fun ..

    couple examples..

 very immersive to have to pay attention even in a starter area as a 7x .. or you will be dead ..

Cool.  I kinda wish they had a "Cool" or "Excellent" button.  I don't call very many things "Awesome".

Hawkaya399

Ridelynn said:

I can remember all the reasons why games shifted over to "spot spawn". It was a stop gap to prevent griefing and exploits.

The real answer is better AI, @Amaranthar is correct. But we aren't quite there yet. It was the one thing I was pretty hyped about coming from EQ Next (StoryBrick et al).

UO had ecosystems originaly. Wolves would hunt animals for food, even humans. Ogres would seek gold. Dragons would live in caves and seek gold too i think. Some animals would graze. They found it relaly difficult to maintain populations. Under server load with lots of players, it became impossible. Players did things they didn't expect. The whole thing collapsed.

It's hard to control the "randomness" to make it ready to serve; ie. the dynamic nature of things wandering around a map. Quests tend to be linear, like a story, and most players want things organized for them, so there's no searching for things. This has all led to a sort of cinematic themepark experience.

It boils down to does anybody wnat a world, as opposed to a game? I think the industyr has resoundingly arrived at an answer: mostly NO. Players mostly want a game.

The real world gives us more than enough world (re: simulation or pain) anyway. So after the ordeals and day at work, we like to sit down relaxed and play a game made explicitly to please us.

Remember? "You're in our world now." Not all games are made to please us becaues they're trying to be worlds.

Ancient_Exile

Hawkaya399 said:

Ridelynn said:

I can remember all the reasons why games shifted over to "spot spawn". It was a stop gap to prevent griefing and exploits.

The real answer is better AI, @Amaranthar is correct. But we aren't quite there yet. It was the one thing I was pretty hyped about coming from EQ Next (StoryBrick et al).

UO had ecosystems originaly. Wolves would hunt animals for food, even humans. Ogres would seek gold. Dragons would live in caves and seek gold too i think. Some animals would graze. They found it relaly difficult to maintain populations. Under server load with lots of players, it became impossible. Players did things they didn't expect. The whole thing collapsed.

It's hard to control the "randomness" to make it ready to serve; ie. the dynamic nature of things wandering around a map. Quests tend to be linear, like a story, and most players want things organized for them, so there's no searching for things. This has all led to a sort of cinematic themepark experience.

It boils down to does anybody wnat a world, as opposed to a game? I think the industyr has resoundingly arrived at an answer: mostly NO. Players mostly want a game.

The real world gives us more than enough world (re: simulation or pain) anyway. So after the ordeals and day at work, we like to sit down relaxed and play a game made explicitly to please us.

Remember? "You're in our world now." Not all games are made to please us becaues they're trying to be worlds.

How much are you pleased by modern MMORPGs?

Amaranthar

Hawkaya399 said:

Ridelynn said:

I can remember all the reasons why games shifted over to "spot spawn". It was a stop gap to prevent griefing and exploits.

The real answer is better AI, @Amaranthar is correct. But we aren't quite there yet. It was the one thing I was pretty hyped about coming from EQ Next (StoryBrick et al).

UO had ecosystems originaly. Wolves would hunt animals for food, even humans. Ogres would seek gold. Dragons would live in caves and seek gold too i think. Some animals would graze. They found it relaly difficult to maintain populations. Under server load with lots of players, it became impossible. Players did things they didn't expect. The whole thing collapsed.

It's hard to control the "randomness" to make it ready to serve; ie. the dynamic nature of things wandering around a map. Quests tend to be linear, like a story, and most players want things organized for them, so there's no searching for things. This has all led to a sort of cinematic themepark experience.

It boils down to does anybody wnat a world, as opposed to a game? I think the industyr has resoundingly arrived at an answer: mostly NO. Players mostly want a game.

The real world gives us more than enough world (re: simulation or pain) anyway. So after the ordeals and day at work, we like to sit down relaxed and play a game made explicitly to please us.

Remember? "You're in our world now." Not all games are made to please us becaues they're trying to be worlds.

UO's wandering MOBs had a set of "wants/goals" like you mentioned, but more than just those things. One was the sort of terrain they preferred, and that kept forest dwellers in forests, etc. 
The big problem, the reason why it collapsed, was because the world was way too small. 
EA's experts figured UO would only sell about 10,000 to 20,000 copies, lifetime. So they made their game world small. Big mistake! 

It can work, you just need a large world so that the players don't simply overrun it. 
I want "worlds", not games. I think there are loads of people who want worlds. Just like there are loads of people who want games. That's not an issue, quality is. 

Gamer54321

Another idea. Haven't thought about it for more than 10 seconds. 

"Curve spawn"

Presumably, drawing a nurbs curve with control points is not mathematically taxing, if every curve is drawn for all players. Maybe a nurbs curve (or rather, several) could be a way to spawn stuff for every player in an area, so as to better synch stuff up, if more than one encounter happens.

Basically, as a dev, you draw a nurbs curve (open or closed) on your map (invisible to the player), and once the player comes close to a control point on the curve, the game roll an encounter from a table, and spawn the thing at some other control point of the curve, near or further away.

Then, you could as a dev, randomize the shape, length and rotate the control points, as if the spawn location moved along the curve, like in a circle as if moving.

Amaranthar

Gamer54321 said:

Another idea. Haven't thought about it for more than 10 seconds. 

"Curve spawn"

Presumably, drawing a nurbs curve with control points is not mathematically taxing, if every curve is drawn for all players. Maybe a nurbs curve (or rather, several) could be a way to spawn stuff for every player in an area, so as to better synch stuff up, if more than one encounter happens.

Basically, as a dev, you draw a nurbs curve (open or closed) on your map (invisible to the player), and once the player comes close to a control point on the curve, the game roll an encounter from a table, and spawn the thing at some other control point of the curve, near or further away.

Then, you could as a dev, randomize the shape, length and rotate the control points, as if the spawn location moved along the curve, like in a circle as if moving.

That interesting. It would keep spawn from popping in right on top of players, but still function with a seemingly random location system. 
I don't know how devs design it, to be honest. 

Iselin

However it's done and what we're all sick of tired of is too much predictability and sameness or having the fact that the wizard is behind the curtain pulling levers shoved in our face.

There's nothing that highlights the idiocy of the conventional spot spawning system more clearly than playing an MMO where you have to kill a specific NPC as part of a quest and having several people standing around the exact spot where it will spawn on a timer. I saw that exact thing in the Alliance starter area near Stormwind of WOW Classic just last year. The idiocy compounded by individual mob tagging. There was a line of players about 60 deep waiting their turn to kill the bandit boss NPC and his 2 henchmen. Yeah the same WOW Classic people were raving about going back to the better days of MMOs. Lol.

Games have been getting away with this lazy shit for far too long instead of improving on what existed in say, UO, more than two decades ago.

Amaranthar

Iselin said:

However it's done and what we're all sick of tired of is too much predictability and sameness or having the fact that the wizard is behind the curtain pulling levers shoved in our face.

There's nothing that highlights the idiocy of the conventional spot spawning system more clearly than playing an MMO where you have to kill a specific NPC as part of a quest and having several people standing around the exact spot where it will spawn on a timer. I saw that exact thing in the Alliance starter area near Stormwind of WOW Classic just last year. The idiocy compounded by individual mob tagging. There was a line of players about 60 deep waiting their turn to kill the bandit boss NPC and his 2 henchmen. Yeah the same WOW Classic people were raving about going back to the better days of MMOs. Lol.

Games have been getting away with this lazy shit for far too long instead of improving on what existed in say, UO, more than two decades ago.

Does WoW Classic not have instances? 
EQ had that same problem, and that was the way WoW "fixed" it. But I didn't pay any attention to WoW when it came out, so I don't know. 

The concept of killing the exact same things at the exact same time in your player's "life", and getting the exact same loot, that never appealed to me. 
Players are just puppets, character's in a script, in those games. 
RP can mean different things, but RPing a script isn't my idea of it. 

Tuor7

In EQ, both types of spawns existed. Most were static, but not all.  For example, occasionally in the West Commonlands (IIRC), a hill giant would spawn. It would roam around the zone usually obliterating whatever it ran into.

Also in EQ, when MOBs lost all targets on their hate lists, they would walk back, not run, to their spawn points. While doing this they could be aggroed just as if they were at their normal spawn points.  This made MOB trains very dangerous in EQ.

Similarly to the above, in early WoW, you could kite MOBs for an indefinite range. This led to people pulling Stitches into Goldshire (or Stormwind). Sometimes even dragons got pulled into interesting places. Blizzard has long since eliminated that, of course.

Iselin

Amaranthar said:

Iselin said:

However it's done and what we're all sick of tired of is too much predictability and sameness or having the fact that the wizard is behind the curtain pulling levers shoved in our face.

There's nothing that highlights the idiocy of the conventional spot spawning system more clearly than playing an MMO where you have to kill a specific NPC as part of a quest and having several people standing around the exact spot where it will spawn on a timer. I saw that exact thing in the Alliance starter area near Stormwind of WOW Classic just last year. The idiocy compounded by individual mob tagging. There was a line of players about 60 deep waiting their turn to kill the bandit boss NPC and his 2 henchmen. Yeah the same WOW Classic people were raving about going back to the better days of MMOs. Lol.

Games have been getting away with this lazy shit for far too long instead of improving on what existed in say, UO, more than two decades ago.

Does WoW Classic not have instances? 
EQ had that same problem, and that was the way WoW "fixed" it. But I didn't pay any attention to WoW when it came out, so I don't know. 

The concept of killing the exact same things at the exact same time in your player's "life", and getting the exact same loot, that never appealed to me. 
Players are just puppets, character's in a script, in those games. 
RP can mean different things, but RPing a script isn't my idea of it. 

Later versions of WOW, not WOW Classic, phased a lot of things and also allowed the more modern mechanic of multiple players getting credit for the same kill, not just whoever "tagged" it first which is the case with Classic.

Phasing is a bit different than instancing. It's like a world within a world. It's how they create an illusion of changing the world: you fight in a village under attack and successfully defend it. Then you're seamlessly in the post-battle version of that village with rubble and smoldering ruins. You can see and interact with others who are also in that phase but not anyone who is in the pre-attack phase.

It's just story telling trickery more suitable to single player games than a wold.

Amathe

I like EQ style, where a mob can spawn at any one of numerous points on the map. And may also need to be triggered somehow.

Ancient_Exile

Iselin said:

Amaranthar said:

Iselin said:

However it's done and what we're all sick of tired of is too much predictability and sameness or having the fact that the wizard is behind the curtain pulling levers shoved in our face.

There's nothing that highlights the idiocy of the conventional spot spawning system more clearly than playing an MMO where you have to kill a specific NPC as part of a quest and having several people standing around the exact spot where it will spawn on a timer. I saw that exact thing in the Alliance starter area near Stormwind of WOW Classic just last year. The idiocy compounded by individual mob tagging. There was a line of players about 60 deep waiting their turn to kill the bandit boss NPC and his 2 henchmen. Yeah the same WOW Classic people were raving about going back to the better days of MMOs. Lol.

Games have been getting away with this lazy shit for far too long instead of improving on what existed in say, UO, more than two decades ago.

Does WoW Classic not have instances? 
EQ had that same problem, and that was the way WoW "fixed" it. But I didn't pay any attention to WoW when it came out, so I don't know. 

The concept of killing the exact same things at the exact same time in your player's "life", and getting the exact same loot, that never appealed to me. 
Players are just puppets, character's in a script, in those games. 
RP can mean different things, but RPing a script isn't my idea of it. 

Later versions of WOW, not WOW Classic, phased a lot of things and also allowed the more modern mechanic of multiple players getting credit for the same kill, not just whoever "tagged" it first which is the case with Classic.

Phasing is a bit different than instancing. It's like a world within a world. It's how they create an illusion of changing the world: you fight in a village under attack and successfully defend it. Then you're seamlessly in the post-battle version of that village with rubble and smoldering ruins. You can see and interact with others who are also in that phase but not anyone who is in the pre-attack phase.

It's just story telling trickery more suitable to single player games than a wold.

EQ2 had some of that "phasing" as you call it.  Like in a certain cavern, if I was at a particular point in a quest-line, I would see the entrance to another part of the cavern with the debris blown away (unblocking it) while other players who were still at an earlier point in the quest-line would still the debris blocking it.

AlBQuirky

Amathe said:

I like EQ style, where a mob can spawn at any one of numerous points on the map. And may also need to be triggered somehow.

Yea, I had no trouble accepting EQ's mob spawning system, nor WoW Classic's. Seeing people lined up to kill a mob was not that earth-shattering (or Azeroth/Norath) as some people cry.

I see good and bad points to either way, just depending how the game is built. Even Gamer54321's mention about "Curve Spawns" looks interesting until 4 or more players cross that curve at the same time at differing points. In other words, if you look at it in a Massively Multiplayer games

Ancient_Exile

AlBQuirky said:

Amathe said:

I like EQ style, where a mob can spawn at any one of numerous points on the map. And may also need to be triggered somehow.

Yea, I had no trouble accepting EQ's mob spawning system, nor WoW Classic's. Seeing people lined up to kill a mob was not that earth-shattering (or Azeroth/Norath) as some people cry.

I see good and bad points to either way, just depending how the game is built. Even Gamer54321's mention about "Curve Spawns" looks interesting until 4 or more players cross that curve at the same time at differing points. In other words, if you look at it in a Massively Multiplayer games

People lined up to kill a mob and having to take turns killing it totally breaks immersion and is lame.

Now, of course, these people could hopefully be allowed to group and kill the mob together, but then it would probably be way too easy and also lame.

But what if the Mob become more powerful depending on how many players came within range?  What if the Mob called subordinates/henchmen to its aid?  And more arrived depending on how many players joined in the battle?  What if all players who did a certain amount of damage to the Mob and/or its henchmen got credit for it?