Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Ever wonder why they still come out with game people dont want?
yukumo
Member Posts: 86
Me and my Friend were just thinking tonight... why do they come out with games that are just like each other with different look
So me and my friend came up with 2 different ideas/forms of MMO
1. A roman type MMO where your in an army of other players - (Yes you can do army's of players, many have before & with todays engines its possible) And you dont just run around willy nilly..you fight for your commander and do what he tells you...NO quests or bull crap..no lvling..just fight and win battles...and if you get sick of that you can run and be a rebel. Hopefully you get the idea here that its all about being back in Rome - NOT FANTASY ROME... Im talking 0. B.C rome 2000 years ago as it was! say bye bye to dragons in this one.....
Additional comments after i posted:
archer- in the army you have your job not to be running around but be in a an archer line and have a line of arrows in front of you and your sole job is to fire arrows in an arc towards the enemy
Calvary- you are either charging or flanking to get a decisive advatage over other players
Spearmen is to protect the army from calvary so you dont get overrun
Reg. Infantry is the bulk of the army and you fight as a group TEAM WORK IS EVERYTHING !!
2. World war MMO - Yes I'm aware of WW2 online but that game is nearing 10 years old and had a terrible lauch ... if they could make an MMO where you went with a squad of players to take strategic points and cut off suplies/medic stations/etc. that would be amazing - To make this work i think that if your character gets hit in the chest for example he should be immediatly taken down just like in real life and hauled off to a medic station.
And to make it epic have 100's and 100's of players not all on one battlefield but fighting a huge scale war as it was when the nazis were in control, digging into treches and actually having good cover!
Before you go all Call of Duty on me i would have to go back to talking about getting hit by a bullet - A shot from a bulelt will drop you in the game just like it would in real life - like i said - so you wont have players jumping around trying to go all solo..NO! They will work together! Hopefully you can get a glipse of the epicness of this all in my mind of having Tens of thousands of players spread all across europe listening to a commander/s (Game developer perhaps?) and fighting a "Real" war
- Yukumo
P.s: My friend had the Rome idea i just put it out there..he will go into it more
P.s.s hopefull you are all sick of fantasy games that are all the same as i am.... Long live uniqueness
Comments
I like my fantasy settings (both low and high), as well as my sci-fi settings.
I'm not sold on the concept of historical or contemporary MMOG themes though.
The chief benefit of setting a game in a sci-fi or fantasy setting is that you have a perfect excuse for doing everything.
Why is there a big hole in that planet? Aliens did it.
What's with the floating city? Wizards did it.
With historical/contemporary themes, you're more restricted.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
In my opinion I cant see these ideas turning into a mmo, especially not the 2nd one. These ideas would work great for single player games or co-op but not for an mmo.
Why people make games who look like eachother? like the so called WoW clones? Because it works! the 'simple' combat by pressing 1-9 a world with lore and quests, it all works! People make these games because people DO want them. Why would WoW have 11 mil subs if people hate it? ...
Sometimes 1+1 makes 3
If your playing a game for the roleplay thats you - because i have never played a game where a gave a rats ass if the "wizards" or "aliens" did it.. I'm in it for game play and this is exactly what i mean by every game being the same here
How many games are there where when you enter its the same stupid cheesy storyline and you just dont care?
I'm sick of flinging firebolts and getting wizards like yourself casting at me!
I wonder why you think historical games are so restricted? The History of Rome and WW2 have a story that no fantasy can beat...a REAL one! How about the story's that not many people remember but are still there? For instance Caesar fighting the Gauls in a super siege outnumbered 5 to 1?
"It's 52 BC and the great Roman Commander Julius Caesar is butchering his way through Gaul. Thanks in large part to the iron will of Caesar, the Romans complete their long quest for total Mediterranean dominance, defeating the Gauls in the final battle of the Gallic Wars. For a period of time though, Gallic victory seemed possible. Out-numbering the Romans five to one, they held the high ground, on the hilltop fortress city of Alesia. Caesar besieges Alesia, however, and builds a wall around the city cutting it off from all possible supply lines. When Gallic reinforcements arrive to break the blockade, Caesar puts a startling twist on his strategy by constructing a second wall between his army and the reinforcements. It is siege upon siege, but Caesar knows the Romans, although fewer in numbers, are better supplied."
Imagine this in a game? and you want your wands flinging spells at dragons? No.
There are two types of players that i have come by in countless MMO's
People who can be robots and repeat the same game over and over
and those who want something different and are tired of MMO conformity
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Your WW2 idea sounds nice in theory but once you look at it practically it starts to fall apart. Firstly the sheer computing power needed for a mass battle involving thousands... Secondly I suspect that this game idea would be better placed on a stratergy game setting where people command units as opposed to individual heroes. Lets be honest in both world wars and in Caesers campaigns the indiviual soldier alone did nothing. Lastly your scope is to limited there is no way your idea will keep the interest of the majority of the mmorpg community.
Though saying all that it would work as a FPS in fact take a look at Day of Defeat (source).
Final note a lot of people play mmorpgs because they enjoyed reading fantasy,sci-fi and hero books/comics and always liked the idea of being the hero in the story. In fact even a lot of them who don't rpg as such still enjoy the settings which allow the developers a free license to wow us with the imagry.
Just my 2 cents
Gadareth
The game mechanics? Im talking about full on PvP
Pick up a sword,axe,bow W/e and join the army NO CLASSES. It doesnt even have to be about Rome vs. Gaul but just everything that was happening in that time! and how would the player fit in? The player would participate in Epic battles which doesnt have to be this one..just an example
- the player would fight for the army and just live in the time period of rome doing what the people did then.
Next - You would handle death by being carried off the field, or being brought back to where your army retreated to and have to dress your wounds or if you died you would have to sit back and not fight in the next fight.!
Next - Small group content...i'm positive i mentioned that this game would be about teamwork in large scale but for people who wanted to be rebels they could raid patrols or trade routes.
Finally -.......40 man raid boss? you have to be kidding me...This is my exact point of why i'm tired of cliche fantasy MMO's.. For some reason you think there needs to be a raid in every MMO which is rediculous, Not every game has to be like Garbage WoW..
Firstly the battles im talking about wouldnt involve thousands of players firing back and forth at each other...
it would maybe be 200 max on a map..and no this is by far and wide not impossible with todays graphics cards reaching over 100 billion fill rate - on cod4 there are maps with 30 vs 30...and that game came out 2 yrs ago. - With no lag i will add
so if the huge map of europe is divided up it wouldnt take that much of a computer... And once again another posts something about "Heroes"...why does your character need to be a hero? Unlike you think the every day soldier did fight quite a bit of fighting in both Rome and ww2 so you would fight and die as a team.. with work this idea could easily happen
Finally here my intent was to throw up a new idea for an mmo - what i posted up is just a rough idea it has so much potential to build on
Sorry, but the game that you're describing is an FPS, not a MMOG.
Huge scale RvR battles are very fun; but they do not happen 24/7 .. even MMOGs based around the concept need additional content to fill in the times where there are only a few people online, you're having a laggy night or just not in the mood for a gankfest.
With no classes, content or support mechancs, it would not work as a MMOG.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Please Repeat this to mortal online... and once again the ideas i put up were basic...not complete
And if im not mistaken MMOG stands for Massive multiplayer online game....which is what i was describing...
Isnt there at least one Roman RTS game out? Forget name. Seems more like the style game for that setting...although I suppose you could go for a modern "mythology" so to speak. I dont think a RL sim MMO would go over very well. Would have to have some type of fantasy elements to it.
WW2 MMO? I am unsure, but isnt Germany still forbidden to discuss the wars in their games/etc. That would be one market closed off to begin with. Also it deals with a time that had a lot of killing...and pretty recent no less. I wouldnt wanna see how folks from different nations would act towards each other in it. It seems to me it would be a festering ground for hate....sort of like the SWG vet forums heh.
And as far as coming out with games folks dont want...the industry is into the mindset of having the mainstream audience playing their game. I think they have totally done away with niche crowds ATM.
Folks may be bothered by the "Uncle Owens" of the world posting about wanting a game, but as a group they are a perfect example of the niche crowd wanting their game...A SCi-fi RL sim sandbox. Not millions of customers ala WOW...but a couple 100k worth of accounts if done well. It would be enough to pay the bills. Nowadays I guess it isnt enough, since we still dont see them all in a similar game to their PRECioUs.
I think in todays market if you want the mainstream money you have to invest in it....this is read huge investment. After watching various games fall in their first yr, it makes investors cautious. SOme Devs seem to think the investment money for their game is their party stash, or means to take a space ship ride.
So instead, investors go with their half arse wow-clones(smaller investment)...and perhaps try to throw in a bit of niche crowd material to get additional subs. Rather than staying true to their intended style, and doing it right. What happens is they fail miserably...again and again.
I think the different gaming styles need to be kept apart generally speaking...the action based MMO(PvE) is not compatible with the PVP/Uncle Owen/Sandbox. I also believe PvE far exceeds chosen gamestyle in North America.
So to get the mainstream crowd, you wanna stay with the PVE theme. And you stick with it...you dont nerf PVE abilities because you added some PVP stuff on the back end. The game wasnt designed for it. And you NEVER...I repeat NEVER make a PVE economy based on tradeskills. Folks are out killing mobs for a reason....it sure isnt so they can afford to buy the same armor set over and over.
I feel EQ done tradeskills right as far as MMOs are concerned. Although they offer some depth to them for folks to pass their time....it in no way compares to the adventuring lifestyle.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
I cant believe you had the balls to say that. In that campaign Caeser had 10 legions of Elite soldiers(50,000+ men) who had been training since age 7. So saying that THE SOLDIER didnt play a part in winning a battle out numberd 5 to 1 is the most arrogant thing i have ever heard. You Sir can go lick a big one.
Moaky i do not understand why a game HAS to have fantasy elements in it? and WW2 games have been coming out for over a decade so i dont think people are sore about it anymore...seeing as there is VERY few people who are still alive who fought in it
Aye there are war games based on the time period. Not a MMO.
I just get the feeling that it could be a bad combination. That is all. Sort of like a breeding ground for racial hate etc. Those tactical games dont encompass the "roleplay" interaction side to it. See too many ways for folks to get racially/nationally angered.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
how about the rumored HP MMO by SOE *shiver*
MyBrute = addicting mini online game!
You should try looking up a game called "Planetside", an MMO-FPS, basically what you've described in both parts, except with a futuristic setting.
"Ever wonder why they still come out with game people dont want?"
Developers make games that publishers want... Publishers dont know what they actually do want... but they want money... and godknows where publishers get their statistics from to say who does, or dosent want a title. They obviously have enough demand for that type of game to make it worth investing millions
To answer your "why games are all similar"... Players k
now what they like... If they play a game, like 90% of it, but then see another game, which has the features they'd like, and as much of the same positive-aspects, then they're likely to be drawn to it.
Say... if fantasy-setting games are popular... and players like humans vs elves vs orks vs misc., and players would like to be able to take part in quests to get stronger and find items... Thats a VERY generic template, but would fit most MMOs on the market at the moment I'd guess. Similarly that most FPS contain the same basic elements.
If something is completly new and unique... it's risky because it costs a LOT of time and money to develop and publish a game... so publishers want to be sure it's going to be popular and sell
Its sad because whether or not my idea would of worked...it was something new and that every poster in here wanted the same mould of crap mmo that theyve been fed for the years is appauling
Well I guess that this is mmoRPG.com, so theres going to be a specific userbase here, of people that like MMO and RPG type games.
The type of people who like FPS or MMO-FPS generally are the target market for publishers... and as I said, they dont want to risk wasting money on new IPs, when they can go for games which are almost gauranteed to be profitable... ie they know people like them.
But also as I said... you basically described an existing game, Planetside
I don't stop at all to wonder why a company would release a product that has a successful model. Apparently a lot of people want games that the OP doesn't seem to think people want.
Planet side is old -really old...and not many people play anymore
Any game gets repetitive. Yours will be too. How many times do you want to stand in a line and fire arrows at people for 20 minutes? Once. How many times do you want to butcher your way through Gaul? Once.
Why? We're not robots that want to repeat the same game over and over.
ill definetely play a roman type MMO.. i love those Roman era.
MyBrute = addicting mini online game!
As you say, it would be a FPS, and I've played way too many to get excited over a FPS that uses a crossbow instead of a gun and a ballista instead of a rocket launcher. Same old same old.
Roma Victor has been out quite a long time.
Great point. You can be a lot more creative artistically if you're not having to explain yourself for every little detail and you don't have to worry about being scrutinized over a little minor detail being awry.