Originally posted by Amaranthar Does dynamic have to involve changing the world? What about just small changes, in specific areas? I'd like to see a world where spawns move around and react in a natural seeming fashion to what they run into. Non-intelligent creatures might build dens or move into caves, set up hunting territories. Intelligent things might roam around looking for a place to start building a village, gather together, send out scouts, go on raids. Basically giving them an ant/bee like AI. When something is wiped out, it doesn't just respawn. New spawns and a constant movement and gathering of NPCs would simulate a more natural seeming world.
Those are excellent comments, and definitely something to think about. I've been thinking about dynamic environments on the higher game level rather than within the game itself. Definitely something to consider. I don't see anyone doing what you mentioned so far, but it would sure change the way games are experienced to see it happen that way.
It's something I'll keep in mind during the design stage myself.
Originally posted by Amaranthar Does dynamic have to involve changing the world? What about just small changes, in specific areas? I'd like to see a world where spawns move around and react in a natural seeming fashion to what they run into. Non-intelligent creatures might build dens or move into caves, set up hunting territories. Intelligent things might roam around looking for a place to start building a village, gather together, send out scouts, go on raids. Basically giving them an ant/bee like AI. When something is wiped out, it doesn't just respawn. New spawns and a constant movement and gathering of NPCs would simulate a more natural seeming world.
Um.....dude! That is a changing world!! Great ideas though.
A dynamic gameworld doesn't need big changes, lots of little ones will do as well. In fact, it probably is better to have lots of little ones making changes all over the places, and have only few big changes occuring in the world. Gives a little order to the chaos, but still allowing a level of freedom to the players that hasn't really been realised before. Sounds exciting!
Originally posted by Kormac Adellion is my strong hope for the future, a game in development for some time now (and aiming to stay in development for so long that they actually have a complete game upon release!) that provides lore, a policy that requires in-character behaviour, premade societies/communities with law enforcement (in-character law), player driven leadership, economy and religion, and also warfare (although war is going to be such a huge drain on national wealth you won't see much of it), everything but the animals, a few shopkeepers and some hireling guards for the filthy rich will be players. (Almost - statement is inaccurate)
Kormac,
Thanks for the heads up. I'll keep an eye out for Adellion. -Hunt'n
----------------------- Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW. Current MMO: Current Games: L4D, Skyrim Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR. Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
Originally posted by SpiritofGame Since AC2 was a bust (they should've cloned AC1 with state-of-the-art graphics instead), believe it or not I still forlornly hope someday Turbine will do, "Asheron's Call: The Prequel (the events leading up to Asheron's "call" which opened portals to other worlds pulling in people -- the players -- to assist Dereth in its time of need)." And this time GET IT RIGHT.
There is one big problem with that - regarding the dynamic world. There was a static/dynamic content editorial, and a reference to a discussion over at the WoW forums, where players requested more dynamic content and the ability to change the world. (The ability to actually win a contested territory, instead of just going there to fight and go home again, for example)
As the discussion went on, it emerged that the designers had put the story "between" two games, forcing it to reach a certain conclusion that could not be subject to freedom.
The dynamics-killer: Set endpoint.
I remember reading that and thinking, "Oh, bloody... why don't you think of that first? You've got ages uncovered in the past where anything could have happened, you could just hape put the entire storyline out of reach to the current games and future games and... argh." If they were actually interested in providing anything but near pointless static content they've blown it beyond what they're willing to try bothering to fix.
Seriously, there is much that could easily be done still (given skilled programmers with some time on their hands, which I expect Blizzard could conjure at need). But they're not really that interested in improving the gaming experience. They desperately add repeated content instead, so that all players have access to more adventures, but nothing that renews itself or generates uniqe stories. Nothing that lets players be part of eachother's story. Your raiding guild and your npc's - that's all you have for story, and the team is too busy making that stuff to improve the game.
Like wetting your pants to keep warm during winter. If you stop pissing before spring you'll have icicles in your pants.
The future: Adellion Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants) Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens) Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
Originally posted by sarbonn The current project I'm working on is dynamic, and just dealing with the problems of content that is generated by interaction of players has proven to be a very interesting mind bender on its own. I mean, if you have a final vision for where the game should be heading, it's hard to allow player interaction to be the driving force, because it sets up a bit of anarchy in the playing dynamic. So, I came to somewhat of a solution (just one of many) that can address this, and that's to either have an ultimate end process where players will unlock it (the easier process) so that it's already built into the world environment, or to allow an either/or circumstance environment where the choices of the multitude of players allows them to dictate the future development of the world itself. This would then require multiple choices for the world itself, meaning cross programming of the environment but it would definitely open up the world for the actions of the players themselves. Granted, this type of dynamic world is designed for massive involvement, not just one player making a choice to change the course of future history.
Sarbonn, thanks for the heads up and good luck towards your success! -Hunt'n
----------------------- Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW. Current MMO: Current Games: L4D, Skyrim Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR. Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
Originally posted by blacksacWell I've noticed in DnL (SoG) which is more or less a dynamic world that a few people are having problems with it's open-endness. Spawns moving, mobs migrating, some say they cant find mobs, or mobs are not layed out in a logical way insted many levels of mobs could be mixed up in one area. Camping is also difficult, because if you camp too long all the mobs in the area will dissapear or move on, people have complained this slows down leveling. This will only get worse when they release DnL with all feature turned on.At this time, I don't think people understand what a dynamic world does to game play and are often left confused... I think static games will be here a long time to come... just easier to pickup and play
I'm sorry what game are you referring to- DnL (SoG)? I just went down the list of MMOs and don't see it. Actually is there a good MMORPG that has an extensively dynamic world in existence? While I don't think companies can spit out static content at a rate to keep up with players, I don't know of a dynamic world MMO that offers the kind of action that I saw in Planetside or WoW. I was playing with Neverwinter Nights today and got bored with it pretty quick. I realize the social aspects of a MMO keep my interest level higher. -Hunt'n
DnL = Dark and Light which is yet to be released [url=http://www.darkandlight.net] SoG = Settlers of Ganareth prequel to DnL out now as a free cut down demo with few features.
DnL has been developed as a Dynamic World, which is actually quite huge in size, with actual weather patterns/seasons, wind/wave dynamics and mob roaming/migrating behavior. (we will see if this all works together after release - 27th April 06). Many people playing SoG atm are confused with the mob spawns, as they expect static sequencial level spawning with easy to find perminent camping spots, but as you know in a dynamic World this rarely happens, so many players are put off... static Worlds are just easier to play.[/b][/quote]
That sounds funny regarding players who are mad that they can't camp and find the same mobs. As you know a dynamic world is well, dynamic! I find the prospect hugely exciting if any developer can pull it off. Have you played SoG? If so, what do you think so far? Thanks! -Hunt'n
----------------------- Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW. Current MMO: Current Games: L4D, Skyrim Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR. Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
I think both are needed in todays world of gaming. Though I like the idea of Dynamic better the fact is in a game like WoW It would be difficult to do without leaving out millions of players. However in smaller games like ATITD its alot easier (haveing said that they do put ALOT of work into it as well not saying its easy to do just easier.)) I like a progresing storyline where the world changes leaders change politics change. Where the world has an actuall changing Idea to it.
The flaw to the dynamic setup is that you lose the casual player as a result. If your a casual player and decide to login into a dynamic game every few days you might find that you back a square one trying to find everything again. I remember back in AC how many people that resubscribed for the shadow war events in the early days and found themselves falling into the crater that became of Arwic. Stuff like this removes the player that isn't on all the time to understand it's significants and it's the casual player that still makes up the BULK of MMO users because you need a source of income to pay for them.
There will always be a mix of static/dynamic and the static will content will always be the most used for it's general accessibilty or dynamic.
Remember the BULK of the players in WOW didn't sit waiting for those stupid gates to be opened they kept grinding on mobs or doing whatever they normally did. Heck the BULK of the WOW player haven't been in that area.
Personally I work most the day I don't want to feel lost whenever I get a chance to log into a game or worse have to schedule when I play for events.
A dynamic world isn't (doesn't have to be) about major changes and holes in the ground. And if a hole were to appear in the place of a city, somebody should run a search and replace routine on the game to move offline players to a safe-point they would be likely to recognize.
The dynamic world is different from day to day. It doesn't mean the forest (where you should find certain animals) will be gone. Unless it has been chopped down in its entirety. A dynamic world is logical. Therefore, massive murdering is not really a feasible means of character advancement. Any grind system of today requires an infinite supply of various "resources" (mainly mobs).
Most likely, a dynamic world would implement this little feature called "training" or an option to "practise". The kind of activity that might logically improve your ability in one or more field of activity. Perhaps "study" would also be reasonable.
Killing would be primarily for purposes of defense, conquest, raiding or ... well, anything but gaining levels. At the end of a fight you will have achieved survival / saved your home / raided a supply train / conquered a village / slain a sworn enemy - or failed in any of these or many other goals.
And the casual player shouldn't suffer from that. If the very active players change the world at a high rate, they might also deplete it, harming themselves. The players who know this would oppose those who fail to understand, and hopefully manage to maintain a steady world - which will also benefit the casual player. One could also put trusted players in initial leadership positions, so that they could use any leadership commands / resources available to keep the world playable, as well as to achieve any in character goals they might have. (They could put guards in the forest and place restrictions on woodcutting and hunting to preserve the forest, for example)
The future: Adellion Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants) Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens) Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
Originally posted by Broodwich The flaw to the dynamic setup is that you lose the casual player as a result. If your a casual player and decide to login into a dynamic game every few days you might find that you back a square one trying to find everything again.
I don't think it's accurate to assume that a dynamic world has no place for a casual player. A lot would depend on how the game is structured just like in a static world like WoW. If there is an emphasis on solo or small party groups, a casual player would be able to find something to do in both static and dynamic settings.
I do like the theme park ride analogy for static worlds. In other words, each setting is like a ride waiting for each player to hop on. I lived with having thousands of target-mobs roaming the landscape for a long time in WoW, but if you think about it, ideally a dynamic world would provide a more varied way to spend your time, with the ability to provide some unique experiences, but not for every player who comes along.
-Hunt'n
----------------------- Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW. Current MMO: Current Games: L4D, Skyrim Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR. Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
Originally posted by Kormac A dynamic world isn't (doesn't have to be) about major changes and holes in the ground. And if a hole were to appear in the place of a city, somebody should run a search and replace routine on the game to move offline players to a safe-point they would be likely to recognize. The dynamic world is different from day to day. It doesn't mean the forest (where you should find certain animals) will be gone. Unless it has been chopped down in its entirety. A dynamic world is logical. Therefore, massive murdering is not really a feasible means of character advancement. Any grind system of today requires an infinite supply of various "resources" (mainly mobs). Most likely, a dynamic world would implement this little feature called "training" or an option to "practise". The kind of activity that might logically improve your ability in one or more field of activity. Perhaps "study" would also be reasonable. Killing would be primarily for purposes of defense, conquest, raiding or ... well, anything but gaining levels. At the end of a fight you will have achieved survival / saved your home / raided a supply train / conquered a village / slain a sworn enemy - or failed in any of these or many other goals. And the casual player shouldn't suffer from that. If the very active players change the world at a high rate, they might also deplete it, harming themselves. The players who know this would oppose those who fail to understand, and hopefully manage to maintain a steady world - which will also benefit the casual player. One could also put trusted players in initial leadership positions, so that they could use any leadership commands / resources available to keep the world playable, as well as to achieve any in character goals they might have. (They could put guards in the forest and place restrictions on woodcutting and hunting to preserve the forest, for example)
Ideally, some truly unique and exciting dynamic world MMos will come along that include combat. I've played ATITD and while combat does not have to be the main focus, it certain would be a nice change of pace. (ATITD has no combat)
-Hunt'n
----------------------- Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW. Current MMO: Current Games: L4D, Skyrim Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR. Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
Comments
Those are excellent comments, and definitely something to think about. I've been thinking about dynamic environments on the higher game level rather than within the game itself. Definitely something to consider. I don't see anyone doing what you mentioned so far, but it would sure change the way games are experienced to see it happen that way.
It's something I'll keep in mind during the design stage myself.
My blog:
http://www.littlesarbonn.com
Um.....dude! That is a changing world!! Great ideas though.
A dynamic gameworld doesn't need big changes, lots of little ones will do as well. In fact, it probably is better to have lots of little ones making changes all over the places, and have only few big changes occuring in the world. Gives a little order to the chaos, but still allowing a level of freedom to the players that hasn't really been realised before. Sounds exciting!
Kormac,
Thanks for the heads up. I'll keep an eye out for Adellion.
-Hunt'n
-----------------------
Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW.
Current MMO:
Current Games: L4D, Skyrim
Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR.
Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
There is one big problem with that - regarding the dynamic world. There was a static/dynamic content editorial, and a reference to a discussion over at the WoW forums, where players requested more dynamic content and the ability to change the world. (The ability to actually win a contested territory, instead of just going there to fight and go home again, for example)
As the discussion went on, it emerged that the designers had put the story "between" two games, forcing it to reach a certain conclusion that could not be subject to freedom.
The dynamics-killer: Set endpoint.
I remember reading that and thinking, "Oh, bloody... why don't you think of that first? You've got ages uncovered in the past where anything could have happened, you could just hape put the entire storyline out of reach to the current games and future games and... argh." If they were actually interested in providing anything but near pointless static content they've blown it beyond what they're willing to try bothering to fix.
Seriously, there is much that could easily be done still (given skilled programmers with some time on their hands, which I expect Blizzard could conjure at need). But they're not really that interested in improving the gaming experience. They desperately add repeated content instead, so that all players have access to more adventures, but nothing that renews itself or generates uniqe stories. Nothing that lets players be part of eachother's story. Your raiding guild and your npc's - that's all you have for story, and the team is too busy making that stuff to improve the game.
Like wetting your pants to keep warm during winter. If you stop pissing before spring you'll have icicles in your pants.
The future: Adellion
Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually
Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants)
Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens)
Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
Sarbonn, thanks for the heads up and good luck towards your success!
-Hunt'n
-----------------------
Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW.
Current MMO:
Current Games: L4D, Skyrim
Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR.
Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
[quote]Originally posted by blacksac
[b]
Originally posted by Huntn
Originally posted by blacksacWell I've noticed in DnL (SoG) which is more or less a dynamic world that a few people are having problems with it's open-endness. Spawns moving, mobs migrating, some say they cant find mobs, or mobs are not layed out in a logical way insted many levels of mobs could be mixed up in one area. Camping is also difficult, because if you camp too long all the mobs in the area will dissapear or move on, people have complained this slows down leveling. This will only get worse when they release DnL with all feature turned on.At this time, I don't think people understand what a dynamic world does to game play and are often left confused... I think static games will be here a long time to come... just easier to pickup and play
I'm sorry what game are you referring to- DnL (SoG)? I just went down the list of MMOs and don't see it.
Actually is there a good MMORPG that has an extensively dynamic world in existence? While I don't think companies can spit out static content at a rate to keep up with players, I don't know of a dynamic world MMO that offers the kind of action that I saw in Planetside or WoW.
I was playing with Neverwinter Nights today and got bored with it pretty quick. I realize the social aspects of a MMO keep my interest level higher.
-Hunt'n
DnL = Dark and Light which is yet to be released [url=http://www.darkandlight.net]
SoG = Settlers of Ganareth prequel to DnL out now as a free cut down demo with few features.
DnL has been developed as a Dynamic World, which is actually quite huge in size, with actual weather patterns/seasons, wind/wave dynamics and mob roaming/migrating behavior. (we will see if this all works together after release - 27th April 06).
Many people playing SoG atm are confused with the mob spawns, as they expect static sequencial level spawning with easy to find perminent camping spots, but as you know in a dynamic World this rarely happens, so many players are put off... static Worlds are just easier to play.[/b][/quote]
That sounds funny regarding players who are mad that they can't camp and find the same mobs. As you know a dynamic world is well, dynamic! I find the prospect hugely exciting if any developer can pull it off.
Have you played SoG? If so, what do you think so far?
Thanks!
-Hunt'n
-----------------------
Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW.
Current MMO:
Current Games: L4D, Skyrim
Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR.
Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
I think both are needed in todays world of gaming. Though I like the idea of Dynamic better the fact is in a game like WoW It would be difficult to do without leaving out millions of players. However in smaller games like ATITD its alot easier (haveing said that they do put ALOT of work into it as well not saying its easy to do just easier.)) I like a progresing storyline where the world changes leaders change politics change. Where the world has an actuall changing Idea to it.
The flaw to the dynamic setup is that you lose the casual player as a result. If your a casual player and decide to login into a dynamic game every few days you might find that you back a square one trying to find everything again. I remember back in AC how many people that resubscribed for the shadow war events in the early days and found themselves falling into the crater that became of Arwic. Stuff like this removes the player that isn't on all the time to understand it's significants and it's the casual player that still makes up the BULK of MMO users because you need a source of income to pay for them.
There will always be a mix of static/dynamic and the static will content will always be the most used for it's general accessibilty or dynamic.
Remember the BULK of the players in WOW didn't sit waiting for those stupid gates to be opened they kept grinding on mobs or doing whatever they normally did. Heck the BULK of the WOW player haven't been in that area.
Personally I work most the day I don't want to feel lost whenever I get a chance to log into a game or worse have to schedule when I play for events.
A dynamic world isn't (doesn't have to be) about major changes and holes in the ground. And if a hole were to appear in the place of a city, somebody should run a search and replace routine on the game to move offline players to a safe-point they would be likely to recognize.
The dynamic world is different from day to day. It doesn't mean the forest (where you should find certain animals) will be gone. Unless it has been chopped down in its entirety. A dynamic world is logical. Therefore, massive murdering is not really a feasible means of character advancement. Any grind system of today requires an infinite supply of various "resources" (mainly mobs).
Most likely, a dynamic world would implement this little feature called "training" or an option to "practise". The kind of activity that might logically improve your ability in one or more field of activity. Perhaps "study" would also be reasonable.
Killing would be primarily for purposes of defense, conquest, raiding or ... well, anything but gaining levels. At the end of a fight you will have achieved survival / saved your home / raided a supply train / conquered a village / slain a sworn enemy - or failed in any of these or many other goals.
And the casual player shouldn't suffer from that. If the very active players change the world at a high rate, they might also deplete it, harming themselves. The players who know this would oppose those who fail to understand, and hopefully manage to maintain a steady world - which will also benefit the casual player. One could also put trusted players in initial leadership positions, so that they could use any leadership commands / resources available to keep the world playable, as well as to achieve any in character goals they might have. (They could put guards in the forest and place restrictions on woodcutting and hunting to preserve the forest, for example)
The future: Adellion
Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually
Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants)
Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens)
Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
I don't think it's accurate to assume that a dynamic world has no place for a casual player. A lot would depend on how the game is structured just like in a static world like WoW. If there is an emphasis on solo or small party groups, a casual player would be able to find something to do in both static and dynamic settings.
I do like the theme park ride analogy for static worlds. In other words, each setting is like a ride waiting for each player to hop on. I lived with having thousands of target-mobs roaming the landscape for a long time in WoW, but if you think about it, ideally a dynamic world would provide a more varied way to spend your time, with the ability to provide some unique experiences, but not for every player who comes along.
-Hunt'n
-----------------------
Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW.
Current MMO:
Current Games: L4D, Skyrim
Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR.
Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
Ideally, some truly unique and exciting dynamic world MMos will come along that include combat. I've played ATITD and while combat does not have to be the main focus, it certain would be a nice change of pace. (ATITD has no combat)
-Hunt'n
-----------------------
Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW.
Current MMO:
Current Games: L4D, Skyrim
Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR.
Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2