Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Offline Play
dhayes68
Member UncommonPosts: 1,388
In another topic there was a discussion about what you get for the price of the box and if the month of play you get with it, makes it worth the price if you don't sub at the end of the month. Especiallly compared to standalone games where you may only play for a month. I pointed out that with a standalone game you may get bored in a month and uninstall but then re-install later and play again. Not so with an MMO, and it gave me an idea.
MMO's should offer unlimited offline play for the price of the box. Sub fees should only be for playing online. I wonder how many MMO's might still be installed on my PC if I'd had that option? Who knows how many I may have re-subscribed too, had the offline play re-ignited interest at some point?
Does't seem fair that if you purchase the box, but not a sub you're essentially left with nothing, does it?
Thoughts?
Edit: To clarify, I'm not talking about being able to play and advance your online char, offline. I'm talking about the ability to play the game offline without a sub, (boring and as pointless as that may seem to some) with a seperate offline only char, since you did pay for client.
Comments
Yes sounds fair, but how would it work? I mean, its not like you should be able to advance your character in any way without being online. Leveling your character offline and then when you subscribe have it updated sounds like you got free time. So, how would it work in your opinion?
If you stand VERY still, and close your eyes, after a minute you can actually FEEL the universe revolving around PvP.
This is a good point.
It will probably have to be designed for offline play in mind.
You can't simply make a MMO and just remove the ability to connect to a server,calling it offline play.
Well, actually you can, but I wouldn't play that. It would be a horrible experience, far worse than any single-player RPG or any game from other genres.
Not to mention, updating your character might create a really nice hacking playfield.
I'd dispute the highlighted statement.
I doubt that I'm the only MMO player who has left an MMO and resubbed at a later date to check how how it has (or hasn't) improved in the time that I've been away.
Honestly, I wouldn't want to play an MMO offline. The gameplay of an MMO pales in comparison to that of a great single player game (like Dragon Age, Oblivion, etc) .. it's the social and "living world" aspect that keeps me playing MMOs.
If you purchase a box but no sub, you don't get nothing .. you get 30 days of playtime unless you decide to subscribe .. and you're aware at the time of purchase that this is the case.
I suppose that developers could offer an offline mode, but what would you actually do? .. level up a character on fedex/kill quests and/or mob grinding, just to have it sit idle on your HDD. Doesn't seem to have much of a point behind it.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Thats why I am looking forward to Global Agenda. I can play the game and evolve my character even if I am not subbed. There is so much the game gives you just for buying the box. I can always sub for a month here and there when I feel like doing the Alliance VS Alliance gameplay which requires a sub.
Yeah, they could do that. One thing they could do is allow you to participate in PvP matches, but without any rewards. You would queue up in a interface similar to FPS games and join in a PvP match, something like WoW arenas and battlegrounds.
The downside is that the game might lose subscribers. If all a player wants to do is play a PvP match once in a while, he doesn't need to subscribe. On the other hand, if you unsubscribe but can still occasionally jump in to a PvP match it might keep your interest in the game going and encourage you to resub later. Global Agenda is going to have this, so I guess we'll see how it works out for them.
His point is that you often will get more than one month of gameplay out of a standalone game for the box price. Even though many standalone games will only keep you playing for about a month, it's common to reinstall it later on and play it again. To resub for an MMO to get more than the first month of gameplay, you have to pay more money.
His point is that you often will get more than one month of gameplay out of a standalone game for the box price. Even though many standalone games will only keep you playing for about a month, it's common to reinstall it later on and play it again. To resub for an MMO to get more than the first month of gameplay, you have to pay more money.
Yes, thank you. I was specifically talking about the value you get just for the price of the box.
But MMOs are specifically made for online gameplay.
Developers give up on the amazing features of single-player RPGs just to make MMORPGs possible.
Unless you design them from day 1 with single-player in mind, it would end up being a horrible game.
Some people might enjoy it...but for me it would be something like: do it or not, it doesn't matter.
I wouldn't have fun in playing a game that was designed as a MMORPG in single-player, unless they designed it for single player as well. MMORPGs lack the gameplay of single-player games but they are very fun when played with people.
And to put a fun RPG and a fun MMORPG in a single box...that would probably cost more than we can imagine and would need an extremely talented team.
This is a good point.
It will probably have to be designed for offline play in mind.
You can't simply make a MMO and just remove the ability to connect to a server,calling it offline play.
Well, actually you can, but I wouldn't play that. It would be a horrible experience, far worse than any single-player RPG or any game from other genres.
Not to mention, updating your character might create a really nice hacking playfield.
The way I would see it to keep things as simple as possible is just to have seperate chars. You could make an offline char or an online char, and you can't play the online char offline or the offline char online.
They lack some of the gameplay of single player games. They do have some gameplay. Exploration, pve, etc... The point is, after paying for the box it seems a shame to end up with nothing, even though you still have the client if you choose not to sub.
I'm not suggesting the games be changed to cater to offline play, it should merely be an option available if someone wanted to take advantage of it. Especially now-a-days when mmo's seem to cater to solo play more and more.
Well, let's nip some issues in the bud to start out:
- You must have a database, exclusively controlled by the publisher/studio, so that no one can cheat and hack their way to success. This lesson about storing information client-side was learnt well over a decade ago.
- You couldn't promote an isolated world using a common database either, as during solo (offline) play, there is no accountability and what would get uploaded at the end of play would be highly uncredible.
The second you have 2 people interacting, you need a neutral party between them. Hello to life in the courtroom, contract and hiring managers....
But the issue of offline play is still an interesting one. I've always thought that during offline times, a 'for fun' game of poker could be played on alternate servers or the like. Take mini-games from MMOs that don't involve everyone's avatar and can easily be started and stopped rather than requiring time commitment to get anywhere. Upload everyone's in-game friend and legion/guild/corp list to the 'offline' servers while maintenance is being done, and play mini-games while socializing to pass the time.
That is exactly right, and we're not saying NO to save WoW, because it is already a lost cause. We are saying NO to dissuade the next group of greedy suits who decide to emulate Blizzard and Cryptic, etc.
We can prevent some of the future games from spewing this crap, but the sooner we start saying no, the better the results will be.
So - Stand up, pull up your pants, and walk away.
- MMO_Doubter
Maybe they should package MMO's with singleplayer campaigns. Subscribers would get more campaigns for the offline mode than people who dont subscribe. You would be able to copy your Online characters and use them to complete the offline campaigns, but not the other way around. Expansions could add even more offline content and whatnot.
My sig is just as logical as your posts are
A great thing would be to have Elder Scrolls 5 as a MMO,set in a certain region and a single-player RPG component, set in another region(that would still allow typical Elder Scrolls features such as mods, etc).
Expansions would add content to both MMO and single-player part, but games will be different and they won't "ruin" each other with compromises that will occur otherwise.
Of course, this idea would probably cost a billion, at least.
Just seperate the online Avatar with the offline one like Hellgate London did and make sure that the game content can be done solo.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
Speaking of which, the Hellgate Revival team should be nearing their first server mod for it soon. I hope they will mod it such that you can use your single player toons on the server version.
His point is that you often will get more than one month of gameplay out of a standalone game for the box price. Even though many standalone games will only keep you playing for about a month, it's common to reinstall it later on and play it again. To resub for an MMO to get more than the first month of gameplay, you have to pay more money.
Yes, you have to pay more .. but with an MMO you're not playing the "same" game.
MMO's evolve. Stuff gets patched. Content gets added, etc. If I'd quit WoW a month after Wrath launched and only resubbed today, it would cost me a sub fee, but the game has changed a lot.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
In WWIIOL you can sorta do that.
Playing EVE
Played Darkfall, Played Wow,
once you can play a character offline and online there opens up a lot of room for cheating and hacks. (diablo 2 is a good example even though its not an MMORPG)
His point is that you often will get more than one month of gameplay out of a standalone game for the box price. Even though many standalone games will only keep you playing for about a month, it's common to reinstall it later on and play it again. To resub for an MMO to get more than the first month of gameplay, you have to pay more money.
Yes, you have to pay more .. but with an MMO you're not playing the "same" game.
MMO's evolve. Stuff gets patched. Content gets added, etc. If I'd quit WoW a month after Wrath launched and only resubbed today, it would cost me a sub fee, but the game has changed a lot.
Free patches and updates would be avail, expansions for money would only be avail if you bought them. No reason though you shouldn't be able to play offline for the content you paid for.
Hellgate: London had an offline mode (see how well that turned out.) Torchlight is single-player atm, with an MMO mode to come later. It has been done, but is it a good idea? Not so much. BTW I have more often returned to an MMO I abandoned than a single-player game, which I either finish or quit. So I believe your basic premise is flawed, and there is no need for an offline mode in an MMO.
This kinda depends on your perception of "free".
I don't consider content patches and updates to be free. In my view, we're paying for them.
That's partially where our subscription fee is going.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
This kinda depends on your perception of "free".
I don't consider content patches and updates to be free. In my view, we're paying for them.
That's partially where our subscription fee is going.
No biggie. Offline play does't need to be up-to-date. Doesn't matter. A lot of mmo's provide updates for free anyway even if you're not subbed, but no biggie.
Point is, you should be able to get something for owning the client, even if you choose not to sub.
It just hit me.
There are so many problems with private servers as developpers do not get their rightful cut of profit from their IP. But yet centralized systems are necessary to promote a fair and universal experience that is paramount for an MMO.
FRANCHISING.
Build a game that is DESIGNED to run on 'private servers'. Patch updates to whomever is a paying subscriber. Of course, ensure your client is encrypted.
As a dev, run and maintain the database of all properly lisenced servers and be the central point for account creation. But let the servers be handled by a 'certified' party, who has paid to be that server's caretaker.
Not only would it help bridge the gap in piracy, but would circumvent offline play problems, as each server could schedule maintenance differently, not to mention updates would happen quicker as it's broken down.
(Yes, I realize this idea would promote functional issues that would need to be addressed, but for the sake of this thread, the idea is sound.)
That is exactly right, and we're not saying NO to save WoW, because it is already a lost cause. We are saying NO to dissuade the next group of greedy suits who decide to emulate Blizzard and Cryptic, etc.
We can prevent some of the future games from spewing this crap, but the sooner we start saying no, the better the results will be.
So - Stand up, pull up your pants, and walk away.
- MMO_Doubter
This kinda depends on your perception of "free".
I don't consider content patches and updates to be free. In my view, we're paying for them.
That's partially where our subscription fee is going.
No biggie. Offline play does't need to be up-to-date. Doesn't matter. A lot of mmo's provide updates for free anyway even if you're not subbed, but no biggie.
Point is, you should be able to get something for owning the client, even if you choose not to sub.
I agree. If you pay for a boxed game, you should get a game you can play without any commitment charges.
But what if you pay for an account to play, and the game is free? Exciting, no?
So let's say it costs $50 to setup an account, paid for in a bundle with the game itself (the game is free!), and costs $15 per month to maintain subscription status. It can be made impossible to play the game without an active account, because the game is after all a free supplement to the privileges of owning the account.
There you go. You get the game for free, and like many free things in the corporate world, there are strings attached.