You just described Escort quests, bub. A lot of games do this.
And they are even more annoying than fedex or collect x quests because 99 times out of 100 the person / thing you are escorting dyes when something breathes on it.
Isn't that want some people want though? Difficulty? That would make it actually hard=)
No. It just makes it annoying. Especially since most of them require you go through a loaded camp of enemies + whatever spawns are for the quest. The NPC got out there on their own they should be able to pull their own weight on the way back.
LoTRO has gotten a little better for that but it seems the NPCs have good amount of HP but zero armor.
You just described Escort quests, bub. A lot of games do this.
And they are even more annoying than fedex or collect x quests because 99 times out of 100 the person / thing you are escorting dyes when something breathes on it.
Isn't that want some people want though? Difficulty? That would make it actually hard=)
No. It just makes it annoying. Especially since most of them require you go through a loaded camp of enemies + whatever spawns are for the quest. The NPC got out there on their own they should be able to pull their own weight on the way back.
LoTRO has gotten a little better for that but it seems the NPCs have good amount of HP but zero armor.
Yeah, going along with what SlyLok said, people want difficulty, not stupid NPCs. No one's going to walk through a camp of armed mercenaries despite how much smaller it makes the trip.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp I have a different opinion on what a "sandbox" is. I don't think either of us is correct, just people differ on what they want to see in a sandbox. IMO, a sandbox has little or nothing to do with your character, but is instead all about your ability to affect the world. Getting a discount on beer is interesting, but doesn't add any sandbox quality to the game. The reason being, it only affects YOU, not the game world. Making beer in the tavern go down or up in price for EVERYONE in the game is a sandbox quality, and much cooler.
I have to agree with Beermangler, sorry.
People expect way too much when it comes to a sandbox. You can't make a game that successfully allows you to affect the world without years of playing the game trying to get to a point you can.
Why? Because you simply can't make a game where everyone can change the world. The biggest reasons being:
1. No one wants everyone to be all-powerful. A lot of people are already hating on SWToR simply because Jedi are a starting class. Imagine if you had more power.
2. All it takes is one asshat to ruin it for everyone. Sure, you have the power to reverse what he did, but that's not the point. The point is that he was able to and you were powerless to stop him because everyone has the same power.
3. If everyone has the same power, the power to change the world, you're not making it a sandbox. You're changing the type of game entirely. You're going from some pseudo-sanbox realm to something completely different, like some sort of Black and White Online or Populous Online...
Are you getting my drift?
I get your drift, but still disagree. You've pointed out some problems with sandbox, but not in my opinion defined sandbox as applying things only to your character.
Think about a sandbox. The kid in the sandbox is shaping what? Their character, or their world? They are shaping the world. They build castles, or forts, or who knows what. They don't just add different clothes to the G.I. Joe in the sandbox.
If all you do is make changes to your CHARACTER, I see no difference in that than in WoW.
So you ad skills, instead of classes. So what? That only affects YOU, not the world. IMO, it's still a themepark.
What takes you out of themepark mode and into sandbox mode is the ability to affect other players in the game.
Taking a fort, like in DAoC.
building a city, like in Shadowbane.
Changing the ownership of territory in space like in EVE.
Those things strike me as sandbox elements. Not adding different choices for building my toon, which only affect me.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp I get your drift, but still disagree. You've pointed out some problems with sandbox, but not in my opinion defined sandbox as applying things only to your character. Think about a sandbox. The kid in the sandbox is shaping what? Their character, or their world? They are shaping the world. They build castles, or forts, or who knows what. They don't just add different clothes to the G.I. Joe in the sandbox. If all you do is make changes to your CHARACTER, I see no difference in that than in WoW. So you ad skills, instead of classes. So what? That only affects YOU, not the world. IMO, it's still a themepark. What takes you out of themepark mode and into sandbox mode is the ability to affect other players in the game. Taking a fort, like in DAoC. building a city, like in Shadowbane. Changing the ownership of territory in space like in EVE. Those things strike me as sandbox elements. Not adding different choices for building my toon, which only affect me.
Yes, they are sandbox elements.
However, you missed out on one important detail: People aren't changing the world as individual people, they're changing the world as a world.
So in effect, even combining all of these elements, the individual would still have no more power than in a themepark. They'd all simply have to rely on each other even more.
Originally posted by ic0n67 A sandbox is where you can do whatever you want withing the boundaries of the world (the end of the sand box). Trouble is you can NEVER have a sandbox game because you are still bound by the rules and regulations of the programmers. In theory you can choose not to kill the rats or not, but there are consequences for doing or not doing the quest which is all summed up in lines of code that the programmer has predetermined. In the original sandbox game (which coincidentally is called "playing in a sandbox") you are only bound by the limits of your own imagination. Choice does not a sandbox make.
The only thing you're bound by is the fact that it's still a piece of code.
... and in that code rules and regulations that the programmers set out for you >.>
Originally posted by ic0n67 A sandbox is where you can do whatever you want withing the boundaries of the world (the end of the sand box). Trouble is you can NEVER have a sandbox game because you are still bound by the rules and regulations of the programmers. In theory you can choose not to kill the rats or not, but there are consequences for doing or not doing the quest which is all summed up in lines of code that the programmer has predetermined. In the original sandbox game (which coincidentally is called "playing in a sandbox") you are only bound by the limits of your own imagination. Choice does not a sandbox make.
The only thing you're bound by is the fact that it's still a piece of code.
... and in that code rules and regulations that the programmers set out for you >.>
Well, think about it. They can't make the code think. They can't make the code breathe. They have their confines in building the game, as much as we have ours in playing it.
Originally posted by ic0n67 A sandbox is where you can do whatever you want withing the boundaries of the world (the end of the sand box). Trouble is you can NEVER have a sandbox game because you are still bound by the rules and regulations of the programmers. In theory you can choose not to kill the rats or not, but there are consequences for doing or not doing the quest which is all summed up in lines of code that the programmer has predetermined. In the original sandbox game (which coincidentally is called "playing in a sandbox") you are only bound by the limits of your own imagination. Choice does not a sandbox make.
The only thing you're bound by is the fact that it's still a piece of code.
... and in that code rules and regulations that the programmers set out for you >.>
Well, think about it. They can't make the code think. They can't make the code breathe. They have their confines in building the game, as much as we have ours in playing it.
That is exactly my point. You can't have a true sandbox game because there is always going to be some restraint holding you back. A great example would be if the programmers let you run around every pixel of the world, but if one day you want the ability to fly you won't be able to because the programmers didn't program in that you could. Even in real life we are bound and restrained by those pesky gravity rules, but in a sandbox, in your own imagination, you can do anything.
The cogitation of playing in a sandbox is that your are only bound by the limitations of your own imagination and thus bound by nothing but that. If any restraints outside your choosing are present then you can't be playing in a sandbox.
Originally posted by ic0n67 That is exactly my point. You can't have a true sandbox game because there is always going to be some restraint holding you back. A great example would be if the programmers let you run around every pixel of the world, but if one day you want the ability to fly you won't be able to because the programmers didn't program in that you could. Even in real life we are bound and restrained by those pesky gravity rules, but in a sandbox, in your own imagination, you can do anything. The cogitation of playing in a sandbox is that your are only bound by the limitations of your own imagination and thus bound by nothing but that.
Aye, and I play in one of these sandboxes every night. It's called sleeping, lol.
Originally posted by ic0n67 That is exactly my point. You can't have a true sandbox game because there is always going to be some restraint holding you back. A great example would be if the programmers let you run around every pixel of the world, but if one day you want the ability to fly you won't be able to because the programmers didn't program in that you could. Even in real life we are bound and restrained by those pesky gravity rules, but in a sandbox, in your own imagination, you can do anything. The cogitation of playing in a sandbox is that your are only bound by the limitations of your own imagination and thus bound by nothing but that.
Aye, and I play in one of these sandboxes every night. It's called sleeping, lol.
As much as you are mocking, you are right ...
“A man's maturity consists in having found again the seriousness one had as a child, at play” ~~ Friedrich Nietzsche
Originally posted by ic0n67 A sandbox is where you can do whatever you want withing the boundaries of the world (the end of the sand box). Trouble is you can NEVER have a sandbox game because you are still bound by the rules and regulations of the programmers. In theory you can choose not to kill the rats or not, but there are consequences for doing or not doing the quest which is all summed up in lines of code that the programmer has predetermined. In the original sandbox game (which coincidentally is called "playing in a sandbox") you are only bound by the limits of your own imagination. Choice does not a sandbox make.
The only thing you're bound by is the fact that it's still a piece of code.
... and in that code rules and regulations that the programmers set out for you >.>
Well, think about it. They can't make the code think. They can't make the code breathe. They have their confines in building the game, as much as we have ours in playing it.
That is exactly my point. You can't have a true sandbox game because there is always going to be some restraint holding you back. A great example would be if the programmers let you run around every pixel of the world, but if one day you want the ability to fly you won't be able to because the programmers didn't program in that you could. Even in real life we are bound and restrained by those pesky gravity rules, but in a sandbox, in your own imagination, you can do anything.
The cogitation of playing in a sandbox is that your are only bound by the limitations of your own imagination and thus bound by nothing but that. If any restraints outside your choosing are present then you can't be playing in a sandbox.
That's pretty much Second Life.
Yea, you can make an area where you can fly if you want to. Or an area where you can't fly.
This is funny. I was just thinking of something like this the other day. Where instead of players grouping up to go kill monsters in a dungeon, what if the monsters grouped up and attacked our cities?
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
The biggest problem here is that all MMOs function as a GUI overlay on a D20 skeleton.
The only way you can break out of this trend is to eliminate levels and quests all together and turn it into a true sandbox game where you can do whatever you want within certain boundaries.
I.E. you can choose to kill 10 rats in the Inn's basement if you venture there (remember, no quest). Now, as a twist, if you do kill them, you get a discount rate for the inn's merchandise. Thus you can shape your character according to your needs. Be a Samaritan, do the things that are obviously helpful for the community you live in, reap the rewards. Be a rogue, mug everything that has a pulse, and expect an arrow in the back every time you blink.
It’s not hard to implement this mechanics, it’s quite easy actually. You already have ‘reputation’ gains for killing adverse mobs in lots of MMOs. You’ll do it because you want to do it, not because you have to do it.
What you said is already done in WOW. It is called reputation grind.
That's pretty much Second Life. Yea, you can make an area where you can fly if you want to. Or an area where you can't fly.
I have never played Second Life so I can't comment on it directly, but there is still code. It is hard, it can't adapt (if it did we'd have Skynet). There has to be some limitations, it just happens to be my limitation i picked in my example isn't present in Second Life. I'd venture to guess that you can't walk down through the surface of the world that normally you'd assume it was solid.
There are defiantly limitations out there because with infinite possibilities out there. Programmers can't code for all possible scenarios; that isn't realistic.
This is funny. I was just thinking of something like this the other day. Where instead of players grouping up to go kill monsters in a dungeon, what if the monsters grouped up and attacked our cities?
They have done that in Final Fantasy XI for years. Mobs attack the main settlement in Art Urgah and depending on the outcome of the battle certain NPCs will be captured and you have to go rescue them so you can use their resources later. In the Wings of the Goddess expansion a new set of mobs attack a new set of cities and based on that outcome the mobs might control the zone and make it harder for the PCs to travel or get goods. They play as world events that you can just into at anytime to join the fight.
There are some additional variations. I am using WOW as the example.
The stealth quest - disguise yourself and walk through a city of enemies to reach some objectives. Only a few mobs can ID & attack you.
The scripted event quest - as part of whole of the quest, you watch a scripted event .. like turned into a spirit, fly around to survey the land.
Crafting quests - fishing, cooking ....
Personally, I don't think there are much more to questing than these basic types we talked about (kill 10 rats, Fed Ex, escort + these 2). Whether it is good or not is not in the core, but the wrapping (any animated sequence to make it interesting?) and combat.
Think about scripted boss fights. Those are very popular & fun but no different than kill quests.
This is funny. I was just thinking of something like this the other day. Where instead of players grouping up to go kill monsters in a dungeon, what if the monsters grouped up and attacked our cities?
They have done that in Final Fantasy XI for years. Mobs attack the main settlement in Art Urgah and depending on the outcome of the battle certain NPCs will be captured and you have to go rescue them so you can use their resources later. In the Wings of the Goddess expansion a new set of mobs attack a new set of cities and based on that outcome the mobs might control the zone and make it harder for the PCs to travel or get goods. They play as world events that you can just into at anytime to join the fight.
It also happened in early horizons, mobs would group up and attack the city that you just built. Made for some great time but some really annoying times when you had to rebuild again.
Venge Sunsoar
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
look at vanguard. the quest system is build around three adventure spheres and all of them were really fun to do. that becuse when you got bored with the kill x rat quest you could always turn your attention to the crafter/diplomancy quests.
What we're truly missing is quests which incorporate real players.
1) Instead if killing 10 rats, perhaps you have to kill 10 real players from XXX faction, steal their XXX, etc.. etc...
2) Instead of killing a mob boss, why not have a quest where you have to kill player XXX? If he's not on, he's not on, too bad. If he is, then kewl. And the person you have to kill would be different for each player so not everyone would be hunting the same dude.
3) You could have a Bounty Board, and it would update with like the 10 most wanted players from the other realms, and you would get special rewards for killing them.... It would be a bill board with the players faces, where they hang out, etcc. maybe some detailed info on their stats, their favorite spell/weapon, etc...
4) The other side would be required to protect player XXX, or even player XXX would have quests where he had to make it through a certain area or do something which would take him off the wanted list....
5) Quests which require sabotage and team killing. If you wanted to go rogue, you have to kill a certain high ranking player from your guild.
6) Spy quests where you gather info from enemy guilds/realms, but the whole time acting like you're on their side, but secretly gathering/stealing important items for the other side.
Sure there problems with some of these. What happens if player XXX hasn't logged on in 3 months? Well, your quest would need to change then.
What about the player XXX who is on the 10 Most Wanted list? Well the question would need to be asked, HOW did he get there in the first place? What's the criteria for being on the bounty board? Was he a spy? Was he particularly evil and killed too many low levels noobs? If so, then he needs to deal with it. Otherwise, maybe ONCE he's killed by someone with that quest, he's no longer a target...
These are very shallow thoughts I know, but I think if some serious thought were to go into them, it would work. The quest system would have to be very dynamic and update with keeping track on player log times, who's on and where are they? In other words, WHY is player XXX the key to a certain quest? What is it he's doing in the world that would make him important in a quest.
I dunno bout y'all, but I think getting myself on the enemy realm Bounty Board would be like my all time favorite goal in the game. How cooool would that be? I could like be standing at the enemy gates, with 20 of my guild mates around all protecting me, and I could moon the enemy players. That's what I'm talkin bout.
Comments
And they are even more annoying than fedex or collect x quests because 99 times out of 100 the person / thing you are escorting dyes when something breathes on it.
Isn't that want some people want though? Difficulty? That would make it actually hard=)
No. It just makes it annoying. Especially since most of them require you go through a loaded camp of enemies + whatever spawns are for the quest. The NPC got out there on their own they should be able to pull their own weight on the way back.
LoTRO has gotten a little better for that but it seems the NPCs have good amount of HP but zero armor.
And they are even more annoying than fedex or collect x quests because 99 times out of 100 the person / thing you are escorting dyes when something breathes on it.
Isn't that want some people want though? Difficulty? That would make it actually hard=)
No. It just makes it annoying. Especially since most of them require you go through a loaded camp of enemies + whatever spawns are for the quest. The NPC got out there on their own they should be able to pull their own weight on the way back.
LoTRO has gotten a little better for that but it seems the NPCs have good amount of HP but zero armor.
Yeah, going along with what SlyLok said, people want difficulty, not stupid NPCs. No one's going to walk through a camp of armed mercenaries despite how much smaller it makes the trip.
Check out the MUD I'm making!
I have to agree with Beermangler, sorry.
People expect way too much when it comes to a sandbox. You can't make a game that successfully allows you to affect the world without years of playing the game trying to get to a point you can.
Why? Because you simply can't make a game where everyone can change the world. The biggest reasons being:
1. No one wants everyone to be all-powerful. A lot of people are already hating on SWToR simply because Jedi are a starting class. Imagine if you had more power.
2. All it takes is one asshat to ruin it for everyone. Sure, you have the power to reverse what he did, but that's not the point. The point is that he was able to and you were powerless to stop him because everyone has the same power.
3. If everyone has the same power, the power to change the world, you're not making it a sandbox. You're changing the type of game entirely. You're going from some pseudo-sanbox realm to something completely different, like some sort of Black and White Online or Populous Online...
Are you getting my drift?
I get your drift, but still disagree. You've pointed out some problems with sandbox, but not in my opinion defined sandbox as applying things only to your character.
Think about a sandbox. The kid in the sandbox is shaping what? Their character, or their world? They are shaping the world. They build castles, or forts, or who knows what. They don't just add different clothes to the G.I. Joe in the sandbox.
If all you do is make changes to your CHARACTER, I see no difference in that than in WoW.
So you ad skills, instead of classes. So what? That only affects YOU, not the world. IMO, it's still a themepark.
What takes you out of themepark mode and into sandbox mode is the ability to affect other players in the game.
Taking a fort, like in DAoC.
building a city, like in Shadowbane.
Changing the ownership of territory in space like in EVE.
Those things strike me as sandbox elements. Not adding different choices for building my toon, which only affect me.
Yes, they are sandbox elements.
However, you missed out on one important detail: People aren't changing the world as individual people, they're changing the world as a world.
So in effect, even combining all of these elements, the individual would still have no more power than in a themepark. They'd all simply have to rely on each other even more.
Check out the MUD I'm making!
The only thing you're bound by is the fact that it's still a piece of code.
... and in that code rules and regulations that the programmers set out for you >.>
On the other hand, if you truly want sandbox, play D&D (the board game) with a drunk DM.
Better to be crazy, provided you know what sane is...
The only thing you're bound by is the fact that it's still a piece of code.
... and in that code rules and regulations that the programmers set out for you >.>
Well, think about it. They can't make the code think. They can't make the code breathe. They have their confines in building the game, as much as we have ours in playing it.
Check out the MUD I'm making!
The only thing you're bound by is the fact that it's still a piece of code.
... and in that code rules and regulations that the programmers set out for you >.>
Well, think about it. They can't make the code think. They can't make the code breathe. They have their confines in building the game, as much as we have ours in playing it.
That is exactly my point. You can't have a true sandbox game because there is always going to be some restraint holding you back. A great example would be if the programmers let you run around every pixel of the world, but if one day you want the ability to fly you won't be able to because the programmers didn't program in that you could. Even in real life we are bound and restrained by those pesky gravity rules, but in a sandbox, in your own imagination, you can do anything.
The cogitation of playing in a sandbox is that your are only bound by the limitations of your own imagination and thus bound by nothing but that. If any restraints outside your choosing are present then you can't be playing in a sandbox.
Aye, and I play in one of these sandboxes every night. It's called sleeping, lol.
Check out the MUD I'm making!
Aye, and I play in one of these sandboxes every night. It's called sleeping, lol.
As much as you are mocking, you are right ...
“A man's maturity consists in having found again the seriousness one had as a child, at play” ~~ Friedrich Nietzsche
The only thing you're bound by is the fact that it's still a piece of code.
... and in that code rules and regulations that the programmers set out for you >.>
Well, think about it. They can't make the code think. They can't make the code breathe. They have their confines in building the game, as much as we have ours in playing it.
That is exactly my point. You can't have a true sandbox game because there is always going to be some restraint holding you back. A great example would be if the programmers let you run around every pixel of the world, but if one day you want the ability to fly you won't be able to because the programmers didn't program in that you could. Even in real life we are bound and restrained by those pesky gravity rules, but in a sandbox, in your own imagination, you can do anything.
The cogitation of playing in a sandbox is that your are only bound by the limitations of your own imagination and thus bound by nothing but that. If any restraints outside your choosing are present then you can't be playing in a sandbox.
That's pretty much Second Life.
Yea, you can make an area where you can fly if you want to. Or an area where you can't fly.
This is funny. I was just thinking of something like this the other day. Where instead of players grouping up to go kill monsters in a dungeon, what if the monsters grouped up and attacked our cities?
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
What you said is already done in WOW. It is called reputation grind.
I have never played Second Life so I can't comment on it directly, but there is still code. It is hard, it can't adapt (if it did we'd have Skynet). There has to be some limitations, it just happens to be my limitation i picked in my example isn't present in Second Life. I'd venture to guess that you can't walk down through the surface of the world that normally you'd assume it was solid.
There are defiantly limitations out there because with infinite possibilities out there. Programmers can't code for all possible scenarios; that isn't realistic.
They have done that in Final Fantasy XI for years. Mobs attack the main settlement in Art Urgah and depending on the outcome of the battle certain NPCs will be captured and you have to go rescue them so you can use their resources later. In the Wings of the Goddess expansion a new set of mobs attack a new set of cities and based on that outcome the mobs might control the zone and make it harder for the PCs to travel or get goods. They play as world events that you can just into at anytime to join the fight.
There are some additional variations. I am using WOW as the example.
The stealth quest - disguise yourself and walk through a city of enemies to reach some objectives. Only a few mobs can ID & attack you.
The scripted event quest - as part of whole of the quest, you watch a scripted event .. like turned into a spirit, fly around to survey the land.
Crafting quests - fishing, cooking ....
Personally, I don't think there are much more to questing than these basic types we talked about (kill 10 rats, Fed Ex, escort + these 2). Whether it is good or not is not in the core, but the wrapping (any animated sequence to make it interesting?) and combat.
Think about scripted boss fights. Those are very popular & fun but no different than kill quests.
They have done that in Final Fantasy XI for years. Mobs attack the main settlement in Art Urgah and depending on the outcome of the battle certain NPCs will be captured and you have to go rescue them so you can use their resources later. In the Wings of the Goddess expansion a new set of mobs attack a new set of cities and based on that outcome the mobs might control the zone and make it harder for the PCs to travel or get goods. They play as world events that you can just into at anytime to join the fight.
It also happened in early horizons, mobs would group up and attack the city that you just built. Made for some great time but some really annoying times when you had to rebuild again.
Venge Sunsoar
look at vanguard. the quest system is build around three adventure spheres and all of them were really fun to do. that becuse when you got bored with the kill x rat quest you could always turn your attention to the crafter/diplomancy quests.
I7@4ghz, 5970@ 1 ghz/5ghz, water cooled||Former setups Byggblogg||Byggblogg 2|| Msi Wind u100
I'll be serious now, but just for a second.
What we're truly missing is quests which incorporate real players.
1) Instead if killing 10 rats, perhaps you have to kill 10 real players from XXX faction, steal their XXX, etc.. etc...
2) Instead of killing a mob boss, why not have a quest where you have to kill player XXX? If he's not on, he's not on, too bad. If he is, then kewl. And the person you have to kill would be different for each player so not everyone would be hunting the same dude.
3) You could have a Bounty Board, and it would update with like the 10 most wanted players from the other realms, and you would get special rewards for killing them.... It would be a bill board with the players faces, where they hang out, etcc. maybe some detailed info on their stats, their favorite spell/weapon, etc...
4) The other side would be required to protect player XXX, or even player XXX would have quests where he had to make it through a certain area or do something which would take him off the wanted list....
5) Quests which require sabotage and team killing. If you wanted to go rogue, you have to kill a certain high ranking player from your guild.
6) Spy quests where you gather info from enemy guilds/realms, but the whole time acting like you're on their side, but secretly gathering/stealing important items for the other side.
Sure there problems with some of these. What happens if player XXX hasn't logged on in 3 months? Well, your quest would need to change then.
What about the player XXX who is on the 10 Most Wanted list? Well the question would need to be asked, HOW did he get there in the first place? What's the criteria for being on the bounty board? Was he a spy? Was he particularly evil and killed too many low levels noobs? If so, then he needs to deal with it. Otherwise, maybe ONCE he's killed by someone with that quest, he's no longer a target...
These are very shallow thoughts I know, but I think if some serious thought were to go into them, it would work. The quest system would have to be very dynamic and update with keeping track on player log times, who's on and where are they? In other words, WHY is player XXX the key to a certain quest? What is it he's doing in the world that would make him important in a quest.
I dunno bout y'all, but I think getting myself on the enemy realm Bounty Board would be like my all time favorite goal in the game. How cooool would that be? I could like be standing at the enemy gates, with 20 of my guild mates around all protecting me, and I could moon the enemy players. That's what I'm talkin bout.