Those are set pieces with scripting. Simulated worlds have not been made yet.
Kenshi, Shenmue Gothic all had scripting as well but that is not the same thing.
A.I. will have to advance to a much more powerful level for a simulated world to be created. A.I. would have to simulate weather, erosion, hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs, millions of individual creatures and insects, natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself. It just isn't possible.
Everything made prior, today or tomorrow are just set pieces with basic scripts.
Again, UO had much of this, in simulated versions, but in basic form that can be expanded. Especially today.
"Simulated weather" - Well, they didn't have weather, but that's no trick. Even weather patterns can be added, with random adjustments even.
"erosion", that would be a problem, especially as "natural erosion". But some erosion could be added in some places, limited to specific events. UO has an example of player houses falling after a player quits. It took months, there were warning signs on inspection, but even art could easily be added to that. Such as small crumblings, webs, old unused appearance, bats, etc. I'm not sure we want full scale natural erosion changing our game worlds, though. Not in our Character's lifetimes.
"Hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs." etc. UO was built on old tech, less processing power that the first smart phones. They had a lot for the times. Today's tech would allow for that, but the question is the AI you expect is needed. You can simulate it all, though, and UO did some of that. Every MOB had "goals", food types, terrain types, desired things, such as gold or resources, etc. Then they "wandered" about the world if their locality was lacking. Remember Richard Garriott's comment before release, that Dragons would expand their hunting if all the deer in their area are killed. They had that stuff in. But they removed much of it because players were running over their world due to it's small size. They still had wandering MOB and goals, though.
"natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself." Corpse and items left on the ground decayed over a short time period. This could be expanded on. For example, items could be left as something hidden until someone digs there. Bones (after corpses) could be left for a longer period, and eventually "sunk" into the ground like items. For the rest of that, again, I'm not sure how much of that we want in a simulated game world.
But, under UO's "wandering MOBs" system (above), the basics of that could happen in today's tech. A problem would be how to keep certain MOBs from pretty much taking over the world. But it wouldn't be a huge trick to slow down spawn (or even zero out) of MOBs that would face starvation in a real setting, thus preventing that issue.
Overall, the 100% simulated world you seem to be talking about is probably not going to be seen in our lifetimes, agreed. But a game could be made that "simulates that" pretty well. Making for a much more interesting game world to adventure in. One that does change, does "grow" new stuff, and feels like a living world.
I have never played an mmorpg for longer than 2 years. I don't think I will live long enough to see the technology capable of making a true virtual world to live in.
No, but a great simulation could be made. UO, all those years ago, did a pretty good job of it, and if they had WoW's budget it could have been spectacular. As a simulation. No one wants a virtual world that's too "real."
As an example, take paper and pencil D&D. All those things you tell the DM you do, and he gives you the results after the roll. All those NPCs that have reactions and say things, that can all be simulated, even with individual NPC goals and desires. It's not a technical marvel so much as the labor to code.
How was UO a good simulation?
and AI no doubt on looking to be able to remove all that NPC chatter code with organic AI interactions, we might also witness AI controlled Boss mobs that will be able to respond to player actions so they no longer become scripted encounters, or adaptable fights, that feel more visceral and real.
Mainly by having a very interactive world, and items. This would take a lot of text to explain it all. But I'll try to explain by telling about some of it. When it comes to items, tools, etc., a lot of that was mundane stuff, but I can see how that can be expanded into more exciting stuff.
First off is the wide social atmosphere, which is lost by the power gaps that separate players in most games, and the level grind that dictates what a player does to advance.
Then there's "items on the ground." You could put anything anywhere it could fit, and stack items too. A table in the corner, a book on the table, and a crystal ball on the book. Or a stack of several books in there. Or a quill on a book. You get the idea.
Books. You could write in them, or copy a story from a website and paste it in a book. A game could add scrolls to write in too. Or anything else desired.
You could put your books in a container (cabinet or any other) or place them anywhere else. Same for all items.
Pitchers could be filled with drinkables: water, wine, ale. When full they had "charges", and you could fill a number of glasses until you used up the charges. Then you could drink the fluids. NOW THIS sounds pretty useless, but I can see expanding that into more. Imagine trying to figure out how to open an unbreakable door in a dungeon, and nothing seems to work. Other things in the dungeon hall are a pool of water, a bucket, a large water font, and a number of other items. And then you fill up the bucket from the pool and pour it into the water font, and it sinks down into the floor a little. So you do a few more buckets, the font drops all the way down, and it activates the door to open. A game could do all kinds of this sort of thing, with all kinds of items.
Tools. In UO, you double clicked on a tool, clicked on an item it could be used on, and either got a result or a list of options to make. A smith hammers was used on ingot to make metal items (gear). Lockpicks were a tool that you used on locks. Why can't a smith's hammer be expanded to use on a large silver bell in a dungeon to get just the right ring tone, and open a secret door? Again, lots of option here. Even leg bones might be useable as a prybar, if the game adds things that can be pried.
So, a very interactive world that simulates how you do things in RL, where you can use that interactivity to enhance the greater experience. Get the idea?
I see what you mean
But it also sounds, well, pretty useless.
I mean for RPG, or just Sim like Environment that all sounds great.
Super cool stuff, I am sure it would break down as the population got larger, which is why games like EQ had to put in items vanishing after a short time, or they would clutter the maps.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I think thinking about it as a simulation or making something like the real world is the more complicated and not necessarily fun way to go about design,
Rather looking at games as a set of interacting systems, see the Gamemakers Toolkit video
In these systemic games the goal is never to faithfully recreate the real world, after all the real world is not a game designed to be fun.
But to create multiple interactive systems that can create immergent gameplay. And depending on the type of game depends on what types of systems you create.
For instance Breath of the Wild uses fire as a system that can interact with burnable objects, Hitman does not as fire would be an easily cheesable solution to pretty much any mission (just set the building on fire)
It is a series of inputs and outputs that can interact. You don't need to actually simulate an ecosystem or chemistry or physics. And you don't need advanced AI.
The scope and type of systems you create depends on the type of gameplay you want to create.
A full on simulation would be too large in scope and also not focused enough to create interesting gameplay, you want some limitations to what players are allowed to do to force them to engage with certain modes of play (like forcing players to be sneaky in a stealth game).
And depending on the focus of the game you can get unnecessarily detailed, Like I wouldn't try to create a whole system for animal grazing, hunting, and migratory patterns unless the game was about hunting Otherwise, making them move randomly within a certain area is good enough for most games, players won't tell the difference.
Those are set pieces with scripting. Simulated worlds have not been made yet.
Kenshi, Shenmue Gothic all had scripting as well but that is not the same thing.
A.I. will have to advance to a much more powerful level for a simulated world to be created. A.I. would have to simulate weather, erosion, hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs, millions of individual creatures and insects, natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself. It just isn't possible.
Everything made prior, today or tomorrow are just set pieces with basic scripts.
Again, UO had much of this, in simulated versions, but in basic form that can be expanded. Especially today.
"Simulated weather" - Well, they didn't have weather, but that's no trick. Even weather patterns can be added, with random adjustments even.
"erosion", that would be a problem, especially as "natural erosion". But some erosion could be added in some places, limited to specific events. UO has an example of player houses falling after a player quits. It took months, there were warning signs on inspection, but even art could easily be added to that. Such as small crumblings, webs, old unused appearance, bats, etc. I'm not sure we want full scale natural erosion changing our game worlds, though. Not in our Character's lifetimes.
"Hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs." etc. UO was built on old tech, less processing power that the first smart phones. They had a lot for the times. Today's tech would allow for that, but the question is the AI you expect is needed. You can simulate it all, though, and UO did some of that. Every MOB had "goals", food types, terrain types, desired things, such as gold or resources, etc. Then they "wandered" about the world if their locality was lacking. Remember Richard Garriott's comment before release, that Dragons would expand their hunting if all the deer in their area are killed. They had that stuff in. But they removed much of it because players were running over their world due to it's small size. They still had wandering MOB and goals, though.
"natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself." Corpse and items left on the ground decayed over a short time period. This could be expanded on. For example, items could be left as something hidden until someone digs there. Bones (after corpses) could be left for a longer period, and eventually "sunk" into the ground like items. For the rest of that, again, I'm not sure how much of that we want in a simulated game world.
But, under UO's "wandering MOBs" system (above), the basics of that could happen in today's tech. A problem would be how to keep certain MOBs from pretty much taking over the world. But it wouldn't be a huge trick to slow down spawn (or even zero out) of MOBs that would face starvation in a real setting, thus preventing that issue.
Overall, the 100% simulated world you seem to be talking about is probably not going to be seen in our lifetimes, agreed. But a game could be made that "simulates that" pretty well. Making for a much more interesting game world to adventure in. One that does change, does "grow" new stuff, and feels like a living world.
It is about the A.I. being able to move over to the desired area of entertainment dynamically and with intelligence.
Fully fleshed out physics that effects everything in the world. Wind blows, fire dies, or spreads fire to surrounding areas and can burn a town to the ground but NPCs can react in real time to put our or gather their things and run away. Animals flee, etc.
Realistic intelligence of Non player beings all with different histories and backgrounds. creatures and animals.
Dynamically reactive societies with historical considerations and motivations.
Economies that are reactive on their own without player intervention.
Wars rage between factions fought by individual fighters not tied to a common script but their own motivations and make decisions on their own based on their historical perspectives.
This type of simulation is not possible and will not be for decades on. Ultima Online is not even in the same conversation as this type of world building. Either is Wurm or any other 'game' ever made. I hope in generations to come an mmorpg can be a simulated world from the inside out. Science, economy, history, society and just opens the door and says: "Come on in. The world has been going for a thousand years already and we have a thousand years of stories already told before you showed up."
Technology and power needed to create it is years and years away, at best. Maybe my great grandkids will see something close.
I think thinking about it as a simulation or making something like the real world is the more complicated and not necessarily fun way to go about design,
Rather looking at games as a set of interacting systems, see the Gamemakers Toolkit video
In these systemic games the goal is never to faithfully recreate the real world, after all the real world is not a game designed to be fun.
But to create multiple interactive systems that can create immergent gameplay. And depending on the type of game depends on what types of systems you create.
For instance Breath of the Wild uses fire as a system that can interact with burnable objects, Hitman does not as fire would be an easily cheesable solution to pretty much any mission (just set the building on fire)
It is a series of inputs and outputs that can interact. You don't need to actually simulate an ecosystem or chemistry or physics. And you don't need advanced AI.
The scope and type of systems you create depends on the type of gameplay you want to create.
A full on simulation would be too large in scope and also not focused enough to create interesting gameplay, you want some limitations to what players are allowed to do to force them to engage with certain modes of play (like forcing players to be sneaky in a stealth game).
And depending on the focus of the game you can get unnecessarily detailed, Like I wouldn't try to create a whole system for animal grazing, hunting, and migratory patterns unless the game was about hunting Otherwise, making them move randomly within a certain area is good enough for most games, players won't tell the difference.
As I was saying. Keep in mind also that in an MMORPG, with thousands of players on a server, the destruction a few hundreds could do could totally waste the game world. Game over.
But I love the concept of "everything affecting everything else." Just not always, in all ways. So a "good simulation" in an MMORPG context has to choose what, and how much, of such interactions is actually good for the game, the world, and the players.
BTW, UO was going to have fire set burnable objects on fire. They decided not to, I think because of the devastation the players could do.
I love that stuff on emergent game play. I've wanted that, and talked about it, including MOB awareness. I'm not done watching that video yet, but very impressive.
Those are set pieces with scripting. Simulated worlds have not been made yet.
Kenshi, Shenmue Gothic all had scripting as well but that is not the same thing.
A.I. will have to advance to a much more powerful level for a simulated world to be created. A.I. would have to simulate weather, erosion, hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs, millions of individual creatures and insects, natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself. It just isn't possible.
Everything made prior, today or tomorrow are just set pieces with basic scripts.
Again, UO had much of this, in simulated versions, but in basic form that can be expanded. Especially today.
"Simulated weather" - Well, they didn't have weather, but that's no trick. Even weather patterns can be added, with random adjustments even.
"erosion", that would be a problem, especially as "natural erosion". But some erosion could be added in some places, limited to specific events. UO has an example of player houses falling after a player quits. It took months, there were warning signs on inspection, but even art could easily be added to that. Such as small crumblings, webs, old unused appearance, bats, etc. I'm not sure we want full scale natural erosion changing our game worlds, though. Not in our Character's lifetimes.
"Hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs." etc. UO was built on old tech, less processing power that the first smart phones. They had a lot for the times. Today's tech would allow for that, but the question is the AI you expect is needed. You can simulate it all, though, and UO did some of that. Every MOB had "goals", food types, terrain types, desired things, such as gold or resources, etc. Then they "wandered" about the world if their locality was lacking. Remember Richard Garriott's comment before release, that Dragons would expand their hunting if all the deer in their area are killed. They had that stuff in. But they removed much of it because players were running over their world due to it's small size. They still had wandering MOB and goals, though.
"natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself." Corpse and items left on the ground decayed over a short time period. This could be expanded on. For example, items could be left as something hidden until someone digs there. Bones (after corpses) could be left for a longer period, and eventually "sunk" into the ground like items. For the rest of that, again, I'm not sure how much of that we want in a simulated game world.
But, under UO's "wandering MOBs" system (above), the basics of that could happen in today's tech. A problem would be how to keep certain MOBs from pretty much taking over the world. But it wouldn't be a huge trick to slow down spawn (or even zero out) of MOBs that would face starvation in a real setting, thus preventing that issue.
Overall, the 100% simulated world you seem to be talking about is probably not going to be seen in our lifetimes, agreed. But a game could be made that "simulates that" pretty well. Making for a much more interesting game world to adventure in. One that does change, does "grow" new stuff, and feels like a living world.
It is about the A.I. being able to move over to the desired area of entertainment dynamically and with intelligence.
Fully fleshed out physics that effects everything in the world. Wind blows, fire dies, or spreads fire to surrounding areas and can burn a town to the ground but NPCs can react in real time to put our or gather their things and run away. Animals flee, etc.
Realistic intelligence of Non player beings all with different histories and backgrounds. creatures and animals.
Dynamically reactive societies with historical considerations and motivations.
Economies that are reactive on their own without player intervention.
Wars rage between factions fought by individual fighters not tied to a common script but their own motivations and make decisions on their own based on their historical perspectives.
This type of simulation is not possible and will not be for decades on. Ultima Online is not even in the same conversation as this type of world building. Either is Wurm or any other 'game' ever made. I hope in generations to come an mmorpg can be a simulated world from the inside out. Science, economy, history, society and just opens the door and says: "Come on in. The world has been going for a thousand years already and we have a thousand years of stories already told before you showed up."
Technology and power needed to create it is years and years away, at best. Maybe my great grandkids will see something close.
With respects, you are taking this too levels that I never meant to get involved with. I don't think a good game wants to either, in some regards. All I meant was that there are systems in UO that >show the way< towards making a game world a >simulation enough< that it feels pretty complete to the players.
Even the MOBs "hearing" things, mentioned above and in that video above, was done in UO. Players put out signals meaning various things (meat, has gold, etc.) that MOBs "heard", causing them to go after it.
UO literally showed the way towards better simulations.
I took a look at the threads that has posts in september, and what it tells me is that mmorpg genre might not be dead but its a pale shade of what it once was.
The thread with most posts is: Starfield Review This thread fallout 76 necro thread Any singleplayer mmorpg? what people feel about wow what kind of player are you.
there's barely any hype for future projects, there's no discussions about recent releases. I couldn't even find a thread on star citizen.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
Those are set pieces with scripting. Simulated worlds have not been made yet.
Kenshi, Shenmue Gothic all had scripting as well but that is not the same thing.
A.I. will have to advance to a much more powerful level for a simulated world to be created. A.I. would have to simulate weather, erosion, hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs, millions of individual creatures and insects, natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself. It just isn't possible.
Everything made prior, today or tomorrow are just set pieces with basic scripts.
Again, UO had much of this, in simulated versions, but in basic form that can be expanded. Especially today.
"Simulated weather" - Well, they didn't have weather, but that's no trick. Even weather patterns can be added, with random adjustments even.
"erosion", that would be a problem, especially as "natural erosion". But some erosion could be added in some places, limited to specific events. UO has an example of player houses falling after a player quits. It took months, there were warning signs on inspection, but even art could easily be added to that. Such as small crumblings, webs, old unused appearance, bats, etc. I'm not sure we want full scale natural erosion changing our game worlds, though. Not in our Character's lifetimes.
"Hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs." etc. UO was built on old tech, less processing power that the first smart phones. They had a lot for the times. Today's tech would allow for that, but the question is the AI you expect is needed. You can simulate it all, though, and UO did some of that. Every MOB had "goals", food types, terrain types, desired things, such as gold or resources, etc. Then they "wandered" about the world if their locality was lacking. Remember Richard Garriott's comment before release, that Dragons would expand their hunting if all the deer in their area are killed. They had that stuff in. But they removed much of it because players were running over their world due to it's small size. They still had wandering MOB and goals, though.
"natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself." Corpse and items left on the ground decayed over a short time period. This could be expanded on. For example, items could be left as something hidden until someone digs there. Bones (after corpses) could be left for a longer period, and eventually "sunk" into the ground like items. For the rest of that, again, I'm not sure how much of that we want in a simulated game world.
But, under UO's "wandering MOBs" system (above), the basics of that could happen in today's tech. A problem would be how to keep certain MOBs from pretty much taking over the world. But it wouldn't be a huge trick to slow down spawn (or even zero out) of MOBs that would face starvation in a real setting, thus preventing that issue.
Overall, the 100% simulated world you seem to be talking about is probably not going to be seen in our lifetimes, agreed. But a game could be made that "simulates that" pretty well. Making for a much more interesting game world to adventure in. One that does change, does "grow" new stuff, and feels like a living world.
It is about the A.I. being able to move over to the desired area of entertainment dynamically and with intelligence.
Fully fleshed out physics that effects everything in the world. Wind blows, fire dies, or spreads fire to surrounding areas and can burn a town to the ground but NPCs can react in real time to put our or gather their things and run away. Animals flee, etc.
Realistic intelligence of Non player beings all with different histories and backgrounds. creatures and animals.
Dynamically reactive societies with historical considerations and motivations.
Economies that are reactive on their own without player intervention.
Wars rage between factions fought by individual fighters not tied to a common script but their own motivations and make decisions on their own based on their historical perspectives.
This type of simulation is not possible and will not be for decades on. Ultima Online is not even in the same conversation as this type of world building. Either is Wurm or any other 'game' ever made. I hope in generations to come an mmorpg can be a simulated world from the inside out. Science, economy, history, society and just opens the door and says: "Come on in. The world has been going for a thousand years already and we have a thousand years of stories already told before you showed up."
Technology and power needed to create it is years and years away, at best. Maybe my great grandkids will see something close.
With respects, you are taking this too levels that I never meant to get involved with. I don't think a good game wants to either, in some regards. All I meant was that there are systems in UO that >show the way< towards making a game world a >simulation enough< that it feels pretty complete to the players.
Even the MOBs "hearing" things, mentioned above and in that video above, was done in UO. Players put out signals meaning various things (meat, has gold, etc.) that MOBs "heard", causing them to go after it.
UO literally showed the way towards better simulations.
Those are set pieces with scripting. Simulated worlds have not been made yet.
Kenshi, Shenmue Gothic all had scripting as well but that is not the same thing.
A.I. will have to advance to a much more powerful level for a simulated world to be created. A.I. would have to simulate weather, erosion, hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs, millions of individual creatures and insects, natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself. It just isn't possible.
Everything made prior, today or tomorrow are just set pieces with basic scripts.
Again, UO had much of this, in simulated versions, but in basic form that can be expanded. Especially today.
"Simulated weather" - Well, they didn't have weather, but that's no trick. Even weather patterns can be added, with random adjustments even.
"erosion", that would be a problem, especially as "natural erosion". But some erosion could be added in some places, limited to specific events. UO has an example of player houses falling after a player quits. It took months, there were warning signs on inspection, but even art could easily be added to that. Such as small crumblings, webs, old unused appearance, bats, etc. I'm not sure we want full scale natural erosion changing our game worlds, though. Not in our Character's lifetimes.
"Hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs." etc. UO was built on old tech, less processing power that the first smart phones. They had a lot for the times. Today's tech would allow for that, but the question is the AI you expect is needed. You can simulate it all, though, and UO did some of that. Every MOB had "goals", food types, terrain types, desired things, such as gold or resources, etc. Then they "wandered" about the world if their locality was lacking. Remember Richard Garriott's comment before release, that Dragons would expand their hunting if all the deer in their area are killed. They had that stuff in. But they removed much of it because players were running over their world due to it's small size. They still had wandering MOB and goals, though.
"natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself." Corpse and items left on the ground decayed over a short time period. This could be expanded on. For example, items could be left as something hidden until someone digs there. Bones (after corpses) could be left for a longer period, and eventually "sunk" into the ground like items. For the rest of that, again, I'm not sure how much of that we want in a simulated game world.
But, under UO's "wandering MOBs" system (above), the basics of that could happen in today's tech. A problem would be how to keep certain MOBs from pretty much taking over the world. But it wouldn't be a huge trick to slow down spawn (or even zero out) of MOBs that would face starvation in a real setting, thus preventing that issue.
Overall, the 100% simulated world you seem to be talking about is probably not going to be seen in our lifetimes, agreed. But a game could be made that "simulates that" pretty well. Making for a much more interesting game world to adventure in. One that does change, does "grow" new stuff, and feels like a living world.
It is about the A.I. being able to move over to the desired area of entertainment dynamically and with intelligence.
Fully fleshed out physics that effects everything in the world. Wind blows, fire dies, or spreads fire to surrounding areas and can burn a town to the ground but NPCs can react in real time to put our or gather their things and run away. Animals flee, etc.
Realistic intelligence of Non player beings all with different histories and backgrounds. creatures and animals.
Dynamically reactive societies with historical considerations and motivations.
Economies that are reactive on their own without player intervention.
Wars rage between factions fought by individual fighters not tied to a common script but their own motivations and make decisions on their own based on their historical perspectives.
This type of simulation is not possible and will not be for decades on. Ultima Online is not even in the same conversation as this type of world building. Either is Wurm or any other 'game' ever made. I hope in generations to come an mmorpg can be a simulated world from the inside out. Science, economy, history, society and just opens the door and says: "Come on in. The world has been going for a thousand years already and we have a thousand years of stories already told before you showed up."
Technology and power needed to create it is years and years away, at best. Maybe my great grandkids will see something close.
With respects, you are taking this too levels that I never meant to get involved with. I don't think a good game wants to either, in some regards. All I meant was that there are systems in UO that >show the way< towards making a game world a >simulation enough< that it feels pretty complete to the players.
Even the MOBs "hearing" things, mentioned above and in that video above, was done in UO. Players put out signals meaning various things (meat, has gold, etc.) that MOBs "heard", causing them to go after it.
UO literally showed the way towards better simulations.
Too bad the game was always rubbish.
Well, the lead designer of that rubbish game is making a jump on what you want, I think. Raph Koster interview on "The Fourth Curtain." Go to the 43:00 mark and listen, unless you've listened to this before. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtj3lltPXyQ
Those are set pieces with scripting. Simulated worlds have not been made yet.
Kenshi, Shenmue Gothic all had scripting as well but that is not the same thing.
A.I. will have to advance to a much more powerful level for a simulated world to be created. A.I. would have to simulate weather, erosion, hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs, millions of individual creatures and insects, natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself. It just isn't possible.
Everything made prior, today or tomorrow are just set pieces with basic scripts.
Again, UO had much of this, in simulated versions, but in basic form that can be expanded. Especially today.
"Simulated weather" - Well, they didn't have weather, but that's no trick. Even weather patterns can be added, with random adjustments even.
"erosion", that would be a problem, especially as "natural erosion". But some erosion could be added in some places, limited to specific events. UO has an example of player houses falling after a player quits. It took months, there were warning signs on inspection, but even art could easily be added to that. Such as small crumblings, webs, old unused appearance, bats, etc. I'm not sure we want full scale natural erosion changing our game worlds, though. Not in our Character's lifetimes.
"Hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs." etc. UO was built on old tech, less processing power that the first smart phones. They had a lot for the times. Today's tech would allow for that, but the question is the AI you expect is needed. You can simulate it all, though, and UO did some of that. Every MOB had "goals", food types, terrain types, desired things, such as gold or resources, etc. Then they "wandered" about the world if their locality was lacking. Remember Richard Garriott's comment before release, that Dragons would expand their hunting if all the deer in their area are killed. They had that stuff in. But they removed much of it because players were running over their world due to it's small size. They still had wandering MOB and goals, though.
"natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself." Corpse and items left on the ground decayed over a short time period. This could be expanded on. For example, items could be left as something hidden until someone digs there. Bones (after corpses) could be left for a longer period, and eventually "sunk" into the ground like items. For the rest of that, again, I'm not sure how much of that we want in a simulated game world.
But, under UO's "wandering MOBs" system (above), the basics of that could happen in today's tech. A problem would be how to keep certain MOBs from pretty much taking over the world. But it wouldn't be a huge trick to slow down spawn (or even zero out) of MOBs that would face starvation in a real setting, thus preventing that issue.
Overall, the 100% simulated world you seem to be talking about is probably not going to be seen in our lifetimes, agreed. But a game could be made that "simulates that" pretty well. Making for a much more interesting game world to adventure in. One that does change, does "grow" new stuff, and feels like a living world.
It is about the A.I. being able to move over to the desired area of entertainment dynamically and with intelligence.
Fully fleshed out physics that effects everything in the world. Wind blows, fire dies, or spreads fire to surrounding areas and can burn a town to the ground but NPCs can react in real time to put our or gather their things and run away. Animals flee, etc.
Realistic intelligence of Non player beings all with different histories and backgrounds. creatures and animals.
Dynamically reactive societies with historical considerations and motivations.
Economies that are reactive on their own without player intervention.
Wars rage between factions fought by individual fighters not tied to a common script but their own motivations and make decisions on their own based on their historical perspectives.
This type of simulation is not possible and will not be for decades on. Ultima Online is not even in the same conversation as this type of world building. Either is Wurm or any other 'game' ever made. I hope in generations to come an mmorpg can be a simulated world from the inside out. Science, economy, history, society and just opens the door and says: "Come on in. The world has been going for a thousand years already and we have a thousand years of stories already told before you showed up."
Technology and power needed to create it is years and years away, at best. Maybe my great grandkids will see something close.
With respects, you are taking this too levels that I never meant to get involved with. I don't think a good game wants to either, in some regards. All I meant was that there are systems in UO that >show the way< towards making a game world a >simulation enough< that it feels pretty complete to the players.
Even the MOBs "hearing" things, mentioned above and in that video above, was done in UO. Players put out signals meaning various things (meat, has gold, etc.) that MOBs "heard", causing them to go after it.
UO literally showed the way towards better simulations.
Too bad the game was always rubbish.
Well, the lead designer of that rubbish game is making a jump on what you want, I think. Raph Koster interview on "The Fourth Curtain." Go to the 43:00 mark and listen, unless you've listened to this before. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtj3lltPXyQ
I respectfully decline. I am not a fan of any game or project he has worked on. I respect him as a technical mind but not a fan of any of his work.
Like was said before, what myself and many, many others want is not possible in this lifetime and perhaps the next. It is ok. MMOs played themselves out 20 years ago. They are what they are until there is a quantum jump in technology. There are many other types of games that are fun and rewarding that provide that drip drip drip of dopamine. For me personally mmos are just not it. Cool to those that still find it there.
Whenever someone writes about UO I feel I missed something when I played and left the game years ago and decided to stay with Everquest. After trying Everquest for awhile in 1999 I did try both UO and AC but neither game came close to Everquest for me so I never went very far in them.
I respectfully decline. I am not a fan of any game or project he has worked on. I respect him as a technical mind but not a fan of any of his work.
Like was said before, what myself and many, many others want is not possible in this lifetime and perhaps the next. It is ok. MMOs played themselves out 20 years ago. They are what they are until there is a quantum jump in technology. There are many other types of games that are fun and rewarding that provide that drip drip drip of dopamine. For me personally mmos are just not it. Cool to those that still find it there.
MMORPGs haven't played themselves out and won't. What they have done and will continue to do is change over time just as every other computer gaming genre has and will.
I respectfully decline. I am not a fan of any game or project he has worked on. I respect him as a technical mind but not a fan of any of his work.
Like was said before, what myself and many, many others want is not possible in this lifetime and perhaps the next. It is ok. MMOs played themselves out 20 years ago. They are what they are until there is a quantum jump in technology. There are many other types of games that are fun and rewarding that provide that drip drip drip of dopamine. For me personally mmos are just not it. Cool to those that still find it there.
MMORPGs haven't played themselves out and won't. What they have done and will continue to do is change over time just as every other computer gaming genre has and will.
You can't be serious right? If they haven't played themselves out then where are all these new mmorpgs that prove it? Why is no large publisher or developer taking the genre by storm with their new shiny MMORPG? The genre is terrible and everyone knows. Players, developers and publishers alike.
The Mmorpg genre is the most sideways genre in all of gaming.
The only way they have 'changed' is in how they can weasel more money out of their mobile phone player base with new predatory monetization.
Until technology allows for a quantum leap in computing power and capabilities the genre will remain a husk of it's once mighty potential.
I respectfully decline. I am not a fan of any game or project he has worked on. I respect him as a technical mind but not a fan of any of his work.
Like was said before, what myself and many, many others want is not possible in this lifetime and perhaps the next. It is ok. MMOs played themselves out 20 years ago. They are what they are until there is a quantum jump in technology. There are many other types of games that are fun and rewarding that provide that drip drip drip of dopamine. For me personally mmos are just not it. Cool to those that still find it there.
MMORPGs haven't played themselves out and won't. What they have done and will continue to do is change over time just as every other computer gaming genre has and will.
You can't be serious right? If they haven't played themselves out then where are all these new mmorpgs that prove it? Why is no large publisher or developer taking the genre by storm with their new shiny MMORPG? The genre is terrible and everyone knows. Players, developers and publishers alike.
The Mmorpg genre is the most sideways genre in all of gaming.
The only way they have 'changed' is in how they can weasel more money out of their mobile phone player base with new predatory monetization.
Until technology allows for a quantum leap in computing power and capabilities the genre will remain a husk of it's once mighty potential.
What changed to diminish the "mighty" potential of MMORPGS, from your arguments you never saw any real potential in the first place, well, not until we get to 25th century technology.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I respectfully decline. I am not a fan of any game or project he has worked on. I respect him as a technical mind but not a fan of any of his work.
Like was said before, what myself and many, many others want is not possible in this lifetime and perhaps the next. It is ok. MMOs played themselves out 20 years ago. They are what they are until there is a quantum jump in technology. There are many other types of games that are fun and rewarding that provide that drip drip drip of dopamine. For me personally mmos are just not it. Cool to those that still find it there.
MMORPGs haven't played themselves out and won't. What they have done and will continue to do is change over time just as every other computer gaming genre has and will.
You can't be serious right? If they haven't played themselves out then where are all these new mmorpgs that prove it? Why is no large publisher or developer taking the genre by storm with their new shiny MMORPG? The genre is terrible and everyone knows. Players, developers and publishers alike.
The Mmorpg genre is the most sideways genre in all of gaming.
The only way they have 'changed' is in how they can weasel more money out of their mobile phone player base with new predatory monetization.
Until technology allows for a quantum leap in computing power and capabilities the genre will remain a husk of it's once mighty potential.
What changed to diminish the "mighty" potential of MMORPGS, from your arguments you never saw any real potential in the first place, well, not until we get to 25th century technology.
My brother had mighty potential to be a doctor but dropped out a year before med school.
Having potential and realizing it are not the same thing in my book. The genre has always felt unrealized.
I respectfully decline. I am not a fan of any game or project he has worked on. I respect him as a technical mind but not a fan of any of his work.
Like was said before, what myself and many, many others want is not possible in this lifetime and perhaps the next. It is ok. MMOs played themselves out 20 years ago. They are what they are until there is a quantum jump in technology. There are many other types of games that are fun and rewarding that provide that drip drip drip of dopamine. For me personally mmos are just not it. Cool to those that still find it there.
MMORPGs haven't played themselves out and won't. What they have done and will continue to do is change over time just as every other computer gaming genre has and will.
You can't be serious right? If they haven't played themselves out then where are all these new mmorpgs that prove it? Why is no large publisher or developer taking the genre by storm with their new shiny MMORPG? The genre is terrible and everyone knows. Players, developers and publishers alike.
The Mmorpg genre is the most sideways genre in all of gaming.
The only way they have 'changed' is in how they can weasel more money out of their mobile phone player base with new predatory monetization.
Until technology allows for a quantum leap in computing power and capabilities the genre will remain a husk of it's once mighty potential.
What changed to diminish the "mighty" potential of MMORPGS, from your arguments you never saw any real potential in the first place, well, not until we get to 25th century technology.
My brother had mighty potential to be a doctor but dropped out a year before med school.
Having potential and realizing it are not the same thing in my book. The genre has always felt unrealized.
Well it's true that the potential was never realised but that's down to a number of factors some of which were outside of the genres control. The obsession gaming has with graphics, one which I champion has not done MMOs any favours in the long run; if you have good graphics you have to start making sacrifices, Massively is usually first to go.
But other elements have been outside of gaming's control, the social aspect of MMOs which was game based became friend based. Social media subsumed social gaming and in that process the community of each game became far less important.
But me, Kyleran and many others are still waiting for a jack-in VR MMORPG that is bigger than the real world. Maybe when the AI's take over will will get one.
I don't think graphics have had anything at all to do with it. Minecraft, Roblox, Battlebit, Stardew Valley there are so many gam es that are big despite graphics being good that it really has nothing to do with graphics. Besides the lovers of the genre do not care as much about that.
The largest mmo market is mobile. So, most mmos developed now are mobile games. Most people in the world have phones. Not everyone has a computer or even want one. Tech changed and the genre could not.
With respects, you are taking this too levels that I never meant to get involved with. I don't think a good game wants to either, in some regards. All I meant was that there are systems in UO that >show the way< towards making a game world a >simulation enough< that it feels pretty complete to the players.
Even the MOBs "hearing" things, mentioned above and in that video above, was done in UO. Players put out signals meaning various things (meat, has gold, etc.) that MOBs "heard", causing them to go after it.
UO literally showed the way towards better simulations.
Too bad the game was always rubbish.
Well, the lead designer of that rubbish game is making a jump on what you want, I think. Raph Koster interview on "The Fourth Curtain." Go to the 43:00 mark and listen, unless you've listened to this before. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtj3lltPXyQ
I respectfully decline. I am not a fan of any game or project he has worked on. I respect him as a technical mind but not a fan of any of his work.
Like was said before, what myself and many, many others want is not possible in this lifetime and perhaps the next. It is ok. MMOs played themselves out 20 years ago. They are what they are until there is a quantum jump in technology. There are many other types of games that are fun and rewarding that provide that drip drip drip of dopamine. For me personally mmos are just not it. Cool to those that still find it there.
Your loss. Raph talks about changing the game world from being built and sent out to our computers, something that's hard to change in an MMORPG for various reasons. Changing that to art, but not placement in a built world, and then sending out packets live, for the world we see as we play. This seems to be an advancement from what they did with SWG.
So, that means that the world can change on the fly, live, right in front of us. You brought up, earlier, "erosion" and "natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself."
This seems like this stuff is coming, if they succeed. At least this stage of it.
And if you're playing that game, and I am, I can't wait to show you how diverting a river can waste your castle. That'll show ya!
I’ll believe it when I see it. Raph talks a lot and delivers little. He hasn’t been relevant in almost 20 years.
Buckle up.
I hope you are right.
I think any real change will come from decades of technology development and unknown developers. By that time all the old guards will be long long gone. Most are gone or irrelevant already. Use the same minds get the same stagnant games we have gotten for the last two decades.
I respectfully decline. I am not a fan of any game or project he has worked on. I respect him as a technical mind but not a fan of any of his work.
Like was said before, what myself and many, many others want is not possible in this lifetime and perhaps the next. It is ok. MMOs played themselves out 20 years ago. They are what they are until there is a quantum jump in technology. There are many other types of games that are fun and rewarding that provide that drip drip drip of dopamine. For me personally mmos are just not it. Cool to those that still find it there.
MMORPGs haven't played themselves out and won't. What they have done and will continue to do is change over time just as every other computer gaming genre has and will.
You can't be serious right? If they haven't played themselves out then where are all these new mmorpgs that prove it? Why is no large publisher or developer taking the genre by storm with their new shiny MMORPG? The genre is terrible and everyone knows. Players, developers and publishers alike.
The Mmorpg genre is the most sideways genre in all of gaming.
The only way they have 'changed' is in how they can weasel more money out of their mobile phone player base with new predatory monetization.
Until technology allows for a quantum leap in computing power and capabilities the genre will remain a husk of it's once mighty potential.
What changed to diminish the "mighty" potential of MMORPGS, from your arguments you never saw any real potential in the first place, well, not until we get to 25th century technology.
My brother had mighty potential to be a doctor but dropped out a year before med school.
Having potential and realizing it are not the same thing in my book. The genre has always felt unrealized.
Well it's true that the potential was never realised but that's down to a number of factors some of which were outside of the genres control. The obsession gaming has with graphics, one which I champion has not done MMOs any favours in the long run; if you have good graphics you have to start making sacrifices, Massively is usually first to go.
But other elements have been outside of gaming's control, the social aspect of MMOs which was game based became friend based. Social media subsumed social gaming and in that process the community of each game became far less important.
But me, Kyleran and many others are still waiting for a jack-in VR MMORPG that is bigger than the real world. Maybe when the AI's take over will will get one.
I forget, which pill do I take to go back into the Matrix, the red or blue one?
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I respectfully decline. I am not a fan of any game or project he has worked on. I respect him as a technical mind but not a fan of any of his work.
Like was said before, what myself and many, many others want is not possible in this lifetime and perhaps the next. It is ok. MMOs played themselves out 20 years ago. They are what they are until there is a quantum jump in technology. There are many other types of games that are fun and rewarding that provide that drip drip drip of dopamine. For me personally mmos are just not it. Cool to those that still find it there.
MMORPGs haven't played themselves out and won't. What they have done and will continue to do is change over time just as every other computer gaming genre has and will.
You can't be serious right? If they haven't played themselves out then where are all these new mmorpgs that prove it? Why is no large publisher or developer taking the genre by storm with their new shiny MMORPG? The genre is terrible and everyone knows. Players, developers and publishers alike.
The Mmorpg genre is the most sideways genre in all of gaming.
The only way they have 'changed' is in how they can weasel more money out of their mobile phone player base with new predatory monetization.
Until technology allows for a quantum leap in computing power and capabilities the genre will remain a husk of it's once mighty potential.
What changed to diminish the "mighty" potential of MMORPGS, from your arguments you never saw any real potential in the first place, well, not until we get to 25th century technology.
My brother had mighty potential to be a doctor but dropped out a year before med school.
Having potential and realizing it are not the same thing in my book. The genre has always felt unrealized.
Well it's true that the potential was never realised but that's down to a number of factors some of which were outside of the genres control. The obsession gaming has with graphics, one which I champion has not done MMOs any favours in the long run; if you have good graphics you have to start making sacrifices, Massively is usually first to go.
But other elements have been outside of gaming's control, the social aspect of MMOs which was game based became friend based. Social media subsumed social gaming and in that process the community of each game became far less important.
But me, Kyleran and many others are still waiting for a jack-in VR MMORPG that is bigger than the real world. Maybe when the AI's take over will will get one.
I forget, which pill do I take to go back into the Matrix, the red or blue one?
Comments
Once upon a time....
"Simulated weather" - Well, they didn't have weather, but that's no trick. Even weather patterns can be added, with random adjustments even.
"erosion", that would be a problem, especially as "natural erosion". But some erosion could be added in some places, limited to specific events.
UO has an example of player houses falling after a player quits. It took months, there were warning signs on inspection, but even art could easily be added to that. Such as small crumblings, webs, old unused appearance, bats, etc.
I'm not sure we want full scale natural erosion changing our game worlds, though. Not in our Character's lifetimes.
"Hundred's of thousands of individual NPCs." etc.
UO was built on old tech, less processing power that the first smart phones.
They had a lot for the times. Today's tech would allow for that, but the question is the AI you expect is needed.
You can simulate it all, though, and UO did some of that.
Every MOB had "goals", food types, terrain types, desired things, such as gold or resources, etc.
Then they "wandered" about the world if their locality was lacking.
Remember Richard Garriott's comment before release, that Dragons would expand their hunting if all the deer in their area are killed.
They had that stuff in. But they removed much of it because players were running over their world due to it's small size.
They still had wandering MOB and goals, though.
"natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself."
Corpse and items left on the ground decayed over a short time period. This could be expanded on. For example, items could be left as something hidden until someone digs there. Bones (after corpses) could be left for a longer period, and eventually "sunk" into the ground like items.
For the rest of that, again, I'm not sure how much of that we want in a simulated game world.
But, under UO's "wandering MOBs" system (above), the basics of that could happen in today's tech. A problem would be how to keep certain MOBs from pretty much taking over the world. But it wouldn't be a huge trick to slow down spawn (or even zero out) of MOBs that would face starvation in a real setting, thus preventing that issue.
Overall, the 100% simulated world you seem to be talking about is probably not going to be seen in our lifetimes, agreed. But a game could be made that "simulates that" pretty well. Making for a much more interesting game world to adventure in. One that does change, does "grow" new stuff, and feels like a living world.
Once upon a time....
But it also sounds, well, pretty useless.
I mean for RPG, or just Sim like Environment that all sounds great.
Super cool stuff, I am sure it would break down as the population got larger, which is why games like EQ had to put in items vanishing after a short time, or they would clutter the maps.
Rather looking at games as a set of interacting systems, see the Gamemakers Toolkit video
In these systemic games the goal is never to faithfully recreate the real world, after all the real world is not a game designed to be fun.
But to create multiple interactive systems that can create immergent gameplay.
And depending on the type of game depends on what types of systems you create.
For instance Breath of the Wild uses fire as a system that can interact with burnable objects,
Hitman does not as fire would be an easily cheesable solution to pretty much any mission (just set the building on fire)
It is a series of inputs and outputs that can interact.
You don't need to actually simulate an ecosystem or chemistry or physics. And you don't need advanced AI.
The scope and type of systems you create depends on the type of gameplay you want to create.
A full on simulation would be too large in scope and also not focused enough to create interesting gameplay, you want some limitations to what players are allowed to do to force them to engage with certain modes of play (like forcing players to be sneaky in a stealth game).
And depending on the focus of the game you can get unnecessarily detailed,
Like I wouldn't try to create a whole system for animal grazing, hunting, and migratory patterns unless the game was about hunting
Otherwise, making them move randomly within a certain area is good enough for most games, players won't tell the difference.
Fully fleshed out physics that effects everything in the world. Wind blows, fire dies, or spreads fire to surrounding areas and can burn a town to the ground but NPCs can react in real time to put our or gather their things and run away. Animals flee, etc.
Realistic intelligence of Non player beings all with different histories and backgrounds. creatures and animals.
Dynamically reactive societies with historical considerations and motivations.
Economies that are reactive on their own without player intervention.
Wars rage between factions fought by individual fighters not tied to a common script but their own motivations and make decisions on their own based on their historical perspectives.
This type of simulation is not possible and will not be for decades on.
Ultima Online is not even in the same conversation as this type of world building.
Either is Wurm or any other 'game' ever made.
I hope in generations to come an mmorpg can be a simulated world from the inside out.
Science, economy, history, society and just opens the door and says:
"Come on in. The world has been going for a thousand years already and we have a thousand years of stories already told before you showed up."
Technology and power needed to create it is years and years away, at best.
Maybe my great grandkids will see something close.
Keep in mind also that in an MMORPG, with thousands of players on a server, the destruction a few hundreds could do could totally waste the game world. Game over.
But I love the concept of "everything affecting everything else." Just not always, in all ways.
So a "good simulation" in an MMORPG context has to choose what, and how much, of such interactions is actually good for the game, the world, and the players.
BTW, UO was going to have fire set burnable objects on fire. They decided not to, I think because of the devastation the players could do.
I love that stuff on emergent game play. I've wanted that, and talked about it, including MOB awareness.
I'm not done watching that video yet, but very impressive.
Once upon a time....
All I meant was that there are systems in UO that >show the way< towards making a game world a >simulation enough< that it feels pretty complete to the players.
Even the MOBs "hearing" things, mentioned above and in that video above, was done in UO. Players put out signals meaning various things (meat, has gold, etc.) that MOBs "heard", causing them to go after it.
UO literally showed the way towards better simulations.
Once upon a time....
The thread with most posts is:
Starfield Review
This thread
fallout 76 necro thread
Any singleplayer mmorpg?
what people feel about wow
what kind of player are you.
there's barely any hype for future projects, there's no discussions about recent releases. I couldn't even find a thread on star citizen.
Go to the 43:00 mark and listen, unless you've listened to this before.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtj3lltPXyQ
Once upon a time....
I am not a fan of any game or project he has worked on.
I respect him as a technical mind but not a fan of any of his work.
Like was said before, what myself and many, many others want is not possible in this lifetime and perhaps the next.
It is ok.
MMOs played themselves out 20 years ago.
They are what they are until there is a quantum jump in technology.
There are many other types of games that are fun and rewarding that provide that drip drip drip of dopamine.
For me personally mmos are just not it. Cool to those that still find it there.
MMORPGs haven't played themselves out and won't. What they have done and will continue to do is change over time just as every other computer gaming genre has and will.
If they haven't played themselves out then where are all these new mmorpgs that prove it?
Why is no large publisher or developer taking the genre by storm with their new shiny MMORPG?
The genre is terrible and everyone knows.
Players, developers and publishers alike.
The Mmorpg genre is the most sideways genre in all of gaming.
The only way they have 'changed' is in how they can weasel more money out of their mobile phone player base with new predatory monetization.
Until technology allows for a quantum leap in computing power and capabilities the genre will remain a husk of it's once mighty potential.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The genre has always felt unrealized.
But other elements have been outside of gaming's control, the social aspect of MMOs which was game based became friend based. Social media subsumed social gaming and in that process the community of each game became far less important.
But me, Kyleran and many others are still waiting for a jack-in VR MMORPG that is bigger than the real world. Maybe when the AI's take over will will get one.
Minecraft, Roblox, Battlebit, Stardew Valley there are so many gam
es that are big despite graphics being good that it really has nothing to do with graphics.
Besides the lovers of the genre do not care as much about that.
The largest mmo market is mobile.
So, most mmos developed now are mobile games.
Most people in the world have phones.
Not everyone has a computer or even want one.
Tech changed and the genre could not.
Raph talks about changing the game world from being built and sent out to our computers, something that's hard to change in an MMORPG for various reasons.
Changing that to art, but not placement in a built world, and then sending out packets live, for the world we see as we play. This seems to be an advancement from what they did with SWG.
So, that means that the world can change on the fly, live, right in front of us.
You brought up, earlier, "erosion" and "natural decay, life, death, ecology, biology, time itself."
This seems like this stuff is coming, if they succeed. At least this stage of it.
And if you're playing that game, and I am, I can't wait to show you how diverting a river can waste your castle.
That'll show ya!
Once upon a time....
Raph talks a lot and delivers little.
He hasn’t been relevant in almost 20 years.
Once upon a time....
Reality sux!
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
red pill