LOL it seems like you have more of a problem with your weapon breaking than having the option to fix it yourself. LOL Wouldn;t it be more convenient for you to use a weapon that doesn't break? LOL
what if the guy standing next to you can fix it, and you do not have to go to the crafters village to fix it at all?
What if I want to fix weapons for my profession? You are essentially killing my profession for giving everyone the option to use weapons that don't break. Where is the freedom in that?
The situation you're describing doesn't happen in reality. I might look for someone to repair it for hours. NPC's aren't good enough because then the crafter would be out of job.
What if I want to play a PvP only character but someone wants to play a PvE only character? That's huge inconvenience especially if I have to look for opponents around the world searching for hours because that's freedom for ya.
You are not limited to a profession in freedom, you can do multiple things. You can be hybrid, just as in real life one person can be a lifeguard, gymnast, and a doctor all in the same day. That is the real world, in the real world we are not limited to " one job" "one skill" You have the chocie to only do pvp or pve, no one would be stopping you. Apparently you haven;t played many non class based games. LOL
You can still stand there and fix all the weapons you wish if you want to do that for a profession, there would be a balance. Of course the better weapons would need to be repaired, but it could be your choice to use a weapon that doesn't. That is what player freedom is all about.
Freedom makes the gameplay inconvenient. For example, if you have a player run economy, there are inconveniences which wouldn't be present if the economy was NPC based. Say for example if you need to fix your weapon, you can't just go to an NPC that is always there, in the same place, no matter what, but you have to find a crafter that does it for you- which can and will be more inconvenient.
Some player's don't like to be restricted by the system and sacrifice gameplay for social aspects for example. They take the convenience and fluidity of gameplay over the feeling of freedom and sense of world. I don't blame them.
I wouldn't play a game like this either. But I still don't want to sacrifice all the freedom and sociality for the sake of gameplay- at that point the game ceases to be an MMORPG for me, and due to not having the level of gameplay found in single player games I get bored. I don't want to play a mediocre game, which said MMO's usually end up being. Social activities and freedom make up for the lack of quality gameplay.
I want a middleground. Which I am getting too, so this guy ain't complaining.
Why can't you fix it yourself? Not have to go to a crafter or npc at all, instead you fix your own weapon? YOu do know that some games already allow you to do things for yourself .. LOL
Freedom does just the opposite of what you propose. For example, if every item in game can be player made, tradable, dropable, customizable, socketable, and salvageable- you could choose how you want to play. If you don;t want to make anything yourself, you can still do so, go kill npcs to obtain your items. However if in the morning you wish to make them instead, go kill some monsters in the afternoon to gain some more and then go kill players in the evening for more items- you could do so as well.
My idea of " social" activities is massive pvp battles, how is that not gameplay?
You will most likely not be able to repair everything yourself unless the game is really simplistic . So inconveniences will arise .
Let's look at why freedom isn't that great:
Freedom means no NPC police . So basically you'll rely on players to act as a police and we all know players are humans and they have flaws. Why not go for flawless beings enforcing the laws instead of players who wont be on 24/7 and won't always care about enforcing moral rules ? And there are loads of other problems like that (like corruption) , i guess thats why EVE has CONCORD : unbiased , unprejudiced , fair , aka: NPC's .
Freedom means everyone may do what he wants as long as his skill progression allows it . Which includes pissing the hell out of people , sure not many would do so but it just requires a few to ruin your day. One corpse camper was enough for me to stop playing WoW for a day . And if we add to that there is no bulletproof common-sense-rule enforcing , it just gets worse.
Freedom also means what Hyan said .
So really freedom has to be handled carefully and limited. There is a reason why we have laws in RL , not just to piss you off , no, to protect you from scumbags .
I can agree some MMO's do lack some freedom , 100% freedom is plain silly if you ask me.
There is a way to " build in" freedom. say you have an in game court system, in game bounty system and have moderators as judge and players as jury to determine a players fate. Say that instead of mutes and bans they sentence them to be tied to trees on an island and other players can throw rodents and stink bombs at them for a designated amount of time.
A bounty system that has wanted posters all over the game world and those who ahve killed the most players in those areas will appear on the wanted posters. The game automatically gives you cash for killing those players.
It doesn;t have to be anarchy and chaos to introduce real player run systems.
But why do that when you can have a flawless law enforcement system ? Why rely on imperfect players ?
The jury could be corrupted by a guild to put a huge bounty on someone they hate . Many players might not value the risk worth the bounty money , etc... Sure it might not be anarchy , but i still prefer flawless enforcement over Human enforcement. Or like eve , a hybrid system . You have concord but you also have bounties.
Please show me a flawless law enforcement system, I have never seen one in any game I have played, so I would love for you to show me that one exists. LMAO @ flawless.. some games have made 12 year old kids moderators...
ALL law enforcement systems are human run in the end.
You are not limited to a profession in freedom, you can do multiple things. You can be hybrid, just as in real life one person can be a lifeguard, gymnast, and a doctor all in the same day. That is the real world, in the real world we are not limited to " one job" "one skill" You have the chocie to only do pvp or pve, no one would be stopping you. Apparently you haven;t played many non class based games. LOL
You can still stand there and fix all the weapons you wish if you want to do that for a profession, there would be a balance. Of course the better weapons would need to be repaired, but it could be your choice to use a weapon that doesn't. That is what player freedom is all about.
I don't want to be hybrid, but I still want to do all the things a hybrid can do. That sounds like a huge inconvenience getting in to the way of me having fun.
I want to use the weapon that needs to be repaired because I think it looks cooler and has better stats, but the game is limiting my freedom because I need to go repair it afterwards, which I don't want to. That's not fun.
a) Freedom
b) Convenience
Choose one.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Freedom makes the gameplay inconvenient. For example, if you have a player run economy, there are inconveniences which wouldn't be present if the economy was NPC based. Say for example if you need to fix your weapon, you can't just go to an NPC that is always there, in the same place, no matter what, but you have to find a crafter that does it for you- which can and will be more inconvenient.
Some player's don't like to be restricted by the system and sacrifice gameplay for social aspects for example. They take the convenience and fluidity of gameplay over the feeling of freedom and sense of world. I don't blame them.
I wouldn't play a game like this either. But I still don't want to sacrifice all the freedom and sociality for the sake of gameplay- at that point the game ceases to be an MMORPG for me, and due to not having the level of gameplay found in single player games I get bored. I don't want to play a mediocre game, which said MMO's usually end up being. Social activities and freedom make up for the lack of quality gameplay.
I want a middleground. Which I am getting too, so this guy ain't complaining.
Why can't you fix it yourself? Not have to go to a crafter or npc at all, instead you fix your own weapon? YOu do know that some games already allow you to do things for yourself .. LOL
Freedom does just the opposite of what you propose. For example, if every item in game can be player made, tradable, dropable, customizable, socketable, and salvageable- you could choose how you want to play. If you don;t want to make anything yourself, you can still do so, go kill npcs to obtain your items. However if in the morning you wish to make them instead, go kill some monsters in the afternoon to gain some more and then go kill players in the evening for more items- you could do so as well.
My idea of " social" activities is massive pvp battles, how is that not gameplay?
You will most likely not be able to repair everything yourself unless the game is really simplistic . So inconveniences will arise .
Let's look at why freedom isn't that great:
Freedom means no NPC police . So basically you'll rely on players to act as a police and we all know players are humans and they have flaws. Why not go for flawless beings enforcing the laws instead of players who wont be on 24/7 and won't always care about enforcing moral rules ? And there are loads of other problems like that (like corruption) , i guess thats why EVE has CONCORD : unbiased , unprejudiced , fair , aka: NPC's .
Freedom means everyone may do what he wants as long as his skill progression allows it . Which includes pissing the hell out of people , sure not many would do so but it just requires a few to ruin your day. One corpse camper was enough for me to stop playing WoW for a day . And if we add to that there is no bulletproof common-sense-rule enforcing , it just gets worse.
Freedom also means what Hyan said .
So really freedom has to be handled carefully and limited. There is a reason why we have laws in RL , not just to piss you off , no, to protect you from scumbags .
I can agree some MMO's do lack some freedom , 100% freedom is plain silly if you ask me.
There is a way to " build in" freedom. say you have an in game court system, in game bounty system and have moderators as judge and players as jury to determine a players fate. Say that instead of mutes and bans they sentence them to be tied to trees on an island and other players can throw rodents and stink bombs at them for a designated amount of time.
A bounty system that has wanted posters all over the game world and those who ahve killed the most players in those areas will appear on the wanted posters. The game automatically gives you cash for killing those players.
It doesn;t have to be anarchy and chaos to introduce real player run systems.
But why do that when you can have a flawless law enforcement system ? Why rely on imperfect players ?
The jury could be corrupted by a guild to put a huge bounty on someone they hate . Many players might not value the risk worth the bounty money , etc... Sure it might not be anarchy , but i still prefer flawless enforcement over Human enforcement. Or like eve , a hybrid system . You have concord but you also have bounties.
Please show me a flawless law enforcement system, I have never seen one in any game I have played, so I would love for you to show me that one exists. LMAO @ flawless.. some games have made 12 year old kids moderators...
ALL law enforement systems are human run in the end.
I'm talking about certain law enforcements which are build into the gameplay.
Eg: in WoW , you have sanctuaries , pvp-free zones , etc... In a game you would like it would be up to the players to make sure no one pvp's in such areas. GL with that.
Or in EvE, in high sec concord gets in . Or in low sec you lose security standing which can have pretty bad consequences , these are flawless systems. And no players would ever be able to enforce rules like NPC's / game mechanics do .
And moderators are there for a totally different reasons. And in your kind of game moderators will still be necessary .
Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt. Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.
Our game, X-Shift, will have a player and NPC run legal system. Players will be able to report crimes, be cops, use forensics and investigative techniques to eventually find the criminal.
"Safe" areas are more heavily patrolled by NPC cops, while seedier areas aren't patrolled by them at all.
There are fines and jail time, and... a certain treat for the truly violent. Or, you could of course, not report to the police and just talk to your powerful friends in the mob.
No, its not absolute freedom. Something has to protect the players who simply don't want to be in a combat-centric environment. In fact, X-Shift is deliberately not focused on combat. However, I do agree that a game world shouldn't be perfect, or sugar-coated either.
You are not limited to a profession in freedom, you can do multiple things. You can be hybrid, just as in real life one person can be a lifeguard, gymnast, and a doctor all in the same day. That is the real world, in the real world we are not limited to " one job" "one skill" You have the chocie to only do pvp or pve, no one would be stopping you. Apparently you haven;t played many non class based games. LOL
You can still stand there and fix all the weapons you wish if you want to do that for a profession, there would be a balance. Of course the better weapons would need to be repaired, but it could be your choice to use a weapon that doesn't. That is what player freedom is all about.
I don't want to be hybrid, but I still want to do all the things a hybrid can do. That sounds like a huge inconvenience getting in to the way of me having fun.
I want to use the weapon that needs to be repaired because I think it looks cooler and has better stats, but the game is limiting my freedom because I need to go repair it afterwards, which I don't want to. That's not fun.
a) Freedom
b) Convenience
Choose one.
I call BS on that argument, freedom enhances convenience, not the other way around. Instead of having to ever go to another NPC again, you can have a stack of weapons that you go through and then you can fix them all yourself when you want to. Then you do not have to stop at all when your weapon breaks, you can fight for extended periods and not worry about it.
Freedom makes the gameplay inconvenient. For example, if you have a player run economy, there are inconveniences which wouldn't be present if the economy was NPC based. Say for example if you need to fix your weapon, you can't just go to an NPC that is always there, in the same place, no matter what, but you have to find a crafter that does it for you- which can and will be more inconvenient.
Some player's don't like to be restricted by the system and sacrifice gameplay for social aspects for example. They take the convenience and fluidity of gameplay over the feeling of freedom and sense of world. I don't blame them.
I wouldn't play a game like this either. But I still don't want to sacrifice all the freedom and sociality for the sake of gameplay- at that point the game ceases to be an MMORPG for me, and due to not having the level of gameplay found in single player games I get bored. I don't want to play a mediocre game, which said MMO's usually end up being. Social activities and freedom make up for the lack of quality gameplay.
I want a middleground. Which I am getting too, so this guy ain't complaining.
Why can't you fix it yourself? Not have to go to a crafter or npc at all, instead you fix your own weapon? YOu do know that some games already allow you to do things for yourself .. LOL
Freedom does just the opposite of what you propose. For example, if every item in game can be player made, tradable, dropable, customizable, socketable, and salvageable- you could choose how you want to play. If you don;t want to make anything yourself, you can still do so, go kill npcs to obtain your items. However if in the morning you wish to make them instead, go kill some monsters in the afternoon to gain some more and then go kill players in the evening for more items- you could do so as well.
My idea of " social" activities is massive pvp battles, how is that not gameplay?
You will most likely not be able to repair everything yourself unless the game is really simplistic . So inconveniences will arise .
Let's look at why freedom isn't that great:
Freedom means no NPC police . So basically you'll rely on players to act as a police and we all know players are humans and they have flaws. Why not go for flawless beings enforcing the laws instead of players who wont be on 24/7 and won't always care about enforcing moral rules ? And there are loads of other problems like that (like corruption) , i guess thats why EVE has CONCORD : unbiased , unprejudiced , fair , aka: NPC's .
Freedom means everyone may do what he wants as long as his skill progression allows it . Which includes pissing the hell out of people , sure not many would do so but it just requires a few to ruin your day. One corpse camper was enough for me to stop playing WoW for a day . And if we add to that there is no bulletproof common-sense-rule enforcing , it just gets worse.
Freedom also means what Hyan said .
So really freedom has to be handled carefully and limited. There is a reason why we have laws in RL , not just to piss you off , no, to protect you from scumbags .
I can agree some MMO's do lack some freedom , 100% freedom is plain silly if you ask me.
There is a way to " build in" freedom. say you have an in game court system, in game bounty system and have moderators as judge and players as jury to determine a players fate. Say that instead of mutes and bans they sentence them to be tied to trees on an island and other players can throw rodents and stink bombs at them for a designated amount of time.
A bounty system that has wanted posters all over the game world and those who ahve killed the most players in those areas will appear on the wanted posters. The game automatically gives you cash for killing those players.
It doesn;t have to be anarchy and chaos to introduce real player run systems.
But why do that when you can have a flawless law enforcement system ? Why rely on imperfect players ?
The jury could be corrupted by a guild to put a huge bounty on someone they hate . Many players might not value the risk worth the bounty money , etc... Sure it might not be anarchy , but i still prefer flawless enforcement over Human enforcement. Or like eve , a hybrid system . You have concord but you also have bounties.
Please show me a flawless law enforcement system, I have never seen one in any game I have played, so I would love for you to show me that one exists. LMAO @ flawless.. some games have made 12 year old kids moderators...
ALL law enforement systems are human run in the end.
I'm talking about certain law enforcements which are build into the gameplay.
Eg: in WoW , you have sanctuaries , pvp-free zones , etc... In a game you would like it would be up to the players to make sure no one pvp's in such areas. GL with that.
Or in EvE, in high sec concord gets in . Or in low sec you lose security standing which can have pretty bad consequences , these are flawless systems. And no players would ever be able to enforce rules like NPC's / game mechanics do .
And moderators are there for a totally different reasons. And in your kind of game moderators will still be necessary .
Actually I discussed the need for zoning earlier in this thread. YOu can have a balance between freedom and imposing on others freedoms. You can choose to go to pvp zones, or not. But if your in a pvp zone, you should expect to pvp. LOL
Now I have heard in wow the " law" system has been abused and is very faulty. People have tried to ban guild leaders to try and make them lose wars and such, and it is ridiculous how these systems can be abused, and how players can be banned without any evidence present at all.
The OP wants a pure sandbox.... pure sandboxes are not fun for 99% of the people. The other 1% are just the griefers that get kicks out of people quitting the game because they are not "hardcore" enough or the people who want to fish all day.
Then they cry why companies don't bother with sandboxes....
Actually I discussed the need for zoning earlier in this thread. YOu can have a balance between freedom and imposing on others freedoms. You can choose to go to pvp zones, or not. But if your in a pvp zone, you should expect to pvp. LOL
Now I have heard in wow the " law" system has been abused and is very faulty. People have tried to ban guild leaders to try and make them lose wars and such, and it is ridiculous how these systems can be abused, and how players can be banned without any evidence present at all.
But , pvp zones and non pvp zones... Thats against freedom that is being preeched. So you agree there are restrictions needed?
That law system you talk about is not the NPC/game mechanics law system. Thats the last resort moderator/gm law system. Which any game have and will always have . No moderators and GM's? Hackfest here we come!
Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt. Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.
I call BS on that argument, freedom enhances convenience, not the other way around. Instead of having to ever go to another NPC again, you can have a stack of weapons that you go through and then you can fix them all yourself when you want to. Then you do not have to stop at all when your weapon breaks, you can fight for extended periods and not worry about it.
So I can only prolong the inevitable inconvenience which will be even more of an inconvenience with so many weapons to fix at once?
Sure is nice for you to make workarounds for me but when all is said and done it would be much more convenient for me if NPC's repaired my stuff, or rather if there was no durability, I could teleport anywhere I want anytime I want and get straight to the action all the time (= my fun) without having to go through unnecessary inconveniences like traveling.
Everything should be sold by NPC's and towns would be compact hubs where everything was readily available in a small area. That's almost as convenient as it gets, but there is no freedom.
You can call BS on the argument (which you obviously do, because there are no flaws in your utopistic world of freedom), but you are only making up temporary workarounds for very real issue; the convenience is gone, no matter how you try to fix it and keep freedom intact.
a) Freedom
b) Convenience
Choose one.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Freedom makes the gameplay inconvenient. For example, if you have a player run economy, there are inconveniences which wouldn't be present if the economy was NPC based. Say for example if you need to fix your weapon, you can't just go to an NPC that is always there, in the same place, no matter what, but you have to find a crafter that does it for you- which can and will be more inconvenient.
Some player's don't like to be restricted by the system and sacrifice gameplay for social aspects for example. They take the convenience and fluidity of gameplay over the feeling of freedom and sense of world. I don't blame them.
I wouldn't play a game like this either. But I still don't want to sacrifice all the freedom and sociality for the sake of gameplay- at that point the game ceases to be an MMORPG for me, and due to not having the level of gameplay found in single player games I get bored. I don't want to play a mediocre game, which said MMO's usually end up being. Social activities and freedom make up for the lack of quality gameplay.
I want a middleground. Which I am getting too, so this guy ain't complaining.
Why can't you fix it yourself? Not have to go to a crafter or npc at all, instead you fix your own weapon? YOu do know that some games already allow you to do things for yourself .. LOL
Freedom does just the opposite of what you propose. For example, if every item in game can be player made, tradable, dropable, customizable, socketable, and salvageable- you could choose how you want to play. If you don;t want to make anything yourself, you can still do so, go kill npcs to obtain your items. However if in the morning you wish to make them instead, go kill some monsters in the afternoon to gain some more and then go kill players in the evening for more items- you could do so as well.
My idea of " social" activities is massive pvp battles, how is that not gameplay?
You will most likely not be able to repair everything yourself unless the game is really simplistic . So inconveniences will arise .
Let's look at why freedom isn't that great:
Freedom means no NPC police . So basically you'll rely on players to act as a police and we all know players are humans and they have flaws. Why not go for flawless beings enforcing the laws instead of players who wont be on 24/7 and won't always care about enforcing moral rules ? And there are loads of other problems like that (like corruption) , i guess thats why EVE has CONCORD : unbiased , unprejudiced , fair , aka: NPC's .
Freedom means everyone may do what he wants as long as his skill progression allows it . Which includes pissing the hell out of people , sure not many would do so but it just requires a few to ruin your day. One corpse camper was enough for me to stop playing WoW for a day . And if we add to that there is no bulletproof common-sense-rule enforcing , it just gets worse.
Freedom also means what Hyan said .
So really freedom has to be handled carefully and limited. There is a reason why we have laws in RL , not just to piss you off , no, to protect you from scumbags .
I can agree some MMO's do lack some freedom , 100% freedom is plain silly if you ask me.
There is a way to " build in" freedom. say you have an in game court system, in game bounty system and have moderators as judge and players as jury to determine a players fate. Say that instead of mutes and bans they sentence them to be tied to trees on an island and other players can throw rodents and stink bombs at them for a designated amount of time.
A bounty system that has wanted posters all over the game world and those who ahve killed the most players in those areas will appear on the wanted posters. The game automatically gives you cash for killing those players.
It doesn;t have to be anarchy and chaos to introduce real player run systems.
But why do that when you can have a flawless law enforcement system ? Why rely on imperfect players ?
The jury could be corrupted by a guild to put a huge bounty on someone they hate . Many players might not value the risk worth the bounty money , etc... Sure it might not be anarchy , but i still prefer flawless enforcement over Human enforcement. Or like eve , a hybrid system . You have concord but you also have bounties.
Please show me a flawless law enforcement system, I have never seen one in any game I have played, so I would love for you to show me that one exists. LMAO @ flawless.. some games have made 12 year old kids moderators...
ALL law enforement systems are human run in the end.
I'm talking about certain law enforcements which are build into the gameplay.
Eg: in WoW , you have sanctuaries , pvp-free zones , etc... In a game you would like it would be up to the players to make sure no one pvp's in such areas. GL with that.
Or in EvE, in high sec concord gets in . Or in low sec you lose security standing which can have pretty bad consequences , these are flawless systems. And no players would ever be able to enforce rules like NPC's / game mechanics do .
And moderators are there for a totally different reasons. And in your kind of game moderators will still be necessary .
Actually I discussed the need for zoning earlier in this thread. YOu can have a balance between freedom and imposing on others freedoms. You can choose to go to pvp zones, or not. But if your in a pvp zone, you should expect to pvp. LOL
Now I have heard in wow the " law" system has been abused and is very faulty. People have tried to ban guild leaders to try and make them lose wars and such, and it is ridiculous how these systems can be abused, and how players can be banned without any evidence present at all.
But , pvp zones and non pvp zones... Thats against freedom that is being preeched. So you agree there are restrictions needed?
That law system you talk about is not the NPC/game mechanics law system. Thats the last resort moderator/gm law system. Which any game have and will always have . No moderators and GM's? Hackfest here we come!
Of course there are some restrictions needed, as I stated in my earlier posts on this thread. Complete freedom isn't practical or even possible in any programmed world. However, the unneccessary limiting of player freedom in games these days is sucking the fun and life out of the genre.
Of course on any game you must have security, I am talking about mutes and bans for in game activity not related to account hacking and 3rd party RMT. Most of the player abuse report systems are ggreatly flawed and it would be a good alternative to have a player run court with in game consequences for players found guilty rather than just muting them, or temporary banning them. Player report systems are usually used against the victims rather than the perps due to their design.
Having mods as judges and players as jury would not only add content, it would have greater player interaction in the process. a Player would have the opportunity to provide a defense for themselves prior to having a decsion made.
I call BS on that argument, freedom enhances convenience, not the other way around. Instead of having to ever go to another NPC again, you can have a stack of weapons that you go through and then you can fix them all yourself when you want to. Then you do not have to stop at all when your weapon breaks, you can fight for extended periods and not worry about it.
So I can only prolong the inevitable inconvenience which will be even more of an inconvenience with so many weapons to fix at once?
Sure is nice for you to make workarounds for me but when all is said and done it would be much more convenient for me if NPC's repaired my stuff, or rather if there was no durability, I could teleport anywhere I want anytime I want and get straight to the action all the time (= my fun) without having to go through unnecessary inconveniences like traveling.
Everything should be sold by NPC's and towns would be compact hubs where everything was readily available in a small area. That's almost as convenient as it gets, but there is no freedom.
You can call BS on the argument (which you obviously do, because there are no flaws in your utopistic world of freedom), but you are only making up temporary workarounds for very real issue; the convenience is gone, no matter how you try to fix it and keep freedom intact.
a) Freedom
b) Convenience
Choose one.
I want the freedom of the convenience to fix my own weapon and never have to go to an npc again. I made my choice.
I call BS on that argument, freedom enhances convenience, not the other way around. Instead of having to ever go to another NPC again, you can have a stack of weapons that you go through and then you can fix them all yourself when you want to. Then you do not have to stop at all when your weapon breaks, you can fight for extended periods and not worry about it.
So I can only prolong the inevitable inconvenience which will be even more of an inconvenience with so many weapons to fix at once?
Sure is nice for you to make workarounds for me but when all is said and done it would be much more convenient for me if NPC's repaired my stuff, or rather if there was no durability, I could teleport anywhere I want anytime I want and get straight to the action all the time (= my fun) without having to go through unnecessary inconveniences like traveling.
Everything should be sold by NPC's and towns would be compact hubs where everything was readily available in a small area. That's almost as convenient as it gets, but there is no freedom.
You can call BS on the argument (which you obviously do, because there are no flaws in your utopistic world of freedom), but you are only making up temporary workarounds for very real issue; the convenience is gone, no matter how you try to fix it and keep freedom intact.
a) Freedom
b) Convenience
Choose one.
I want the freedom of the convenience to fix my own weapon and never have to go to an npc again. I made my choice.
Well yes i would like that to. but i would also like there to be NPC's to repair things i cannot. So what we can conclude is that Hybrid wins. Let the players be able to repair certain things themselves through certain proffessions/skills but also give the options for NPC's to repair items (the best would be for NPC repairs to be slightly more costly )
Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt. Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.
I want the freedom of the convenience to fix my own weapon and never have to go to an npc again. I made my choice.
And then you take away freedom from someone else for the sake of -your- convenience.
What you want is a game that gives -you- the freedom to do whatever -you- want to do while taking away the freedom from everyone else.
I stand by my words. You can't get both.
Nonsense.. utter NONSENSE.
You lose nothing. Nothing at all. You can go to the same area where you would have had an NPC repairing items and have a player do the same thing. I have played games with player crafting, and the way it works is players themselves deisgnate an area that players go to repair weapons for other players, just as you would have an npc do it for you, in fact the places where players usually go to repair items are the places where items are in the most need of repair, that is how it works in a player system. Silly. Player crafting systems are MORE convenient than NPC systems due to the fact that players can relocate to the areas needed most. NPC's do not.
I have already had both, and it works great. Have you?
I want the freedom of the convenience to fix my own weapon and never have to go to an npc again. I made my choice.
And then you take away freedom from someone else for the sake of -your- convenience.
What you want is a game that gives -you- the freedom to do whatever -you- want to do while taking away the freedom from everyone else.
I stand by my words. You can't get both.
Oh, I don't think so.
Let's say a game has an NPC that fixes weapons. The devs make it so that it is of a certain cost. They also give dedicated crafters the ability to do the same thing.
Those who want to use the NPC can and those who want to work on their crafting and their weapon fixing abilities can do so.
Just like I refuse to craft. ever. hate it hate it hate it.
so I buy from players or NPC's. However, there are players who love crafting. They would rather work up the skill and do it for themselves.
More power to them.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Let's say a game has an NPC that fixes weapons. The devs make it so that it is of a certain cost. They also give dedicated crafters the ability to do the same thing.
Those who want to use the NPC can and those who want to work on their crafting and their weapon fixing abilities can do so.
Just like I refuse to craft. ever. hate it hate it hate it.
so I buy from players or NPC's. However, there are players who love crafting. They would rather work up the skill and do it for themselves.
More power to them.
Yeah, because an NPC run economy is just so much better for the crafter than actual player run economy. That's a big part of the appeal of crafting- that you can affect the economy with it, sell your goods to different people, not just for yourself.
Just working up the skill is a small part of the appeal. Interaction is important.
Either you do it conveniently (NPC run economy), or give more freedom to the player to do what he wants (player run economy).
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
I call BS on that argument, freedom enhances convenience, not the other way around. Instead of having to ever go to another NPC again, you can have a stack of weapons that you go through and then you can fix them all yourself when you want to. Then you do not have to stop at all when your weapon breaks, you can fight for extended periods and not worry about it.
So I can only prolong the inevitable inconvenience which will be even more of an inconvenience with so many weapons to fix at once?
Sure is nice for you to make workarounds for me but when all is said and done it would be much more convenient for me if NPC's repaired my stuff, or rather if there was no durability, I could teleport anywhere I want anytime I want and get straight to the action all the time (= my fun) without having to go through unnecessary inconveniences like traveling.
Everything should be sold by NPC's and towns would be compact hubs where everything was readily available in a small area. That's almost as convenient as it gets, but there is no freedom.
You can call BS on the argument (which you obviously do, because there are no flaws in your utopistic world of freedom), but you are only making up temporary workarounds for very real issue; the convenience is gone, no matter how you try to fix it and keep freedom intact.
a) Freedom
b) Convenience
Choose one.
I want the freedom of the convenience to fix my own weapon and never have to go to an npc again. I made my choice.
Well yes i would like that to. but i would also like there to be NPC's to repair things i cannot. So what we can conclude is that Hybrid wins. Let the players be able to repair certain things themselves through certain proffessions/skills but also give the options for NPC's to repair items (the best would be for NPC repairs to be slightly more costly )
I agree that a system that has both is a good system. The NPC prices higher than that of players, but allow players to have the option to be able to do all repairs themselves if they so choose. Though from what I have seen in games that do just that , the NPC areas wind up becoming ghost towns because the players are handling it much better.
You, are an Idiot. Balance allows people of all skill levels to have some measure of fair ground. People who complain about "Balance" Are those who even on the classes that are still considered OP, Suck with. Balance is at the core of everything in life. And no expection in Video games. Balance keeps the game equal for everyone, because skill, is not something that be measured into coding.
Balance is an ilusion.
A never ending struggle to achieve something that cannot be achieved, which is comprised of negative side effects to our gaming freedom.
Whether pure 100% balance is truly attainable or not is inconsequential. Failure to strive towards that goal will result in shallow uninteresting gameplay.
It'd be like if our justice system was like "pure 100% justice isn't attainable, so let's not even try!" The results would be terrible!
As a more general reply to the thread, games require constraints to be interesting:
The Tetris player with the freedom to reject pieces he does not like (removing them from play) will end up with a less fun/interesting Tetris game.
The Chess player with the freedom to move Pawns in any direction will end up with a less interesting Chess game.
The Poker player with the freedom to draw as many cards as he wants to build his hand will end up with a less interesting Poker game.
Games are not fun without rules. Without contsricting players' freedom, games simply cannot exist in any entertaining fashion.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think Interesting has it exactly right. The MMORPG industry needs a shot of fresh blood and new ideas (or old ideas brought back), and above all player freedom - while keeping the origins of MMORPG's in mind and why we play them. We want to get immersed in another world. Not a world of scripted events, stats, and numbers chaining players to a predictable path of dungeon a,b,d,c,d,e ect. There has absolutely been a de-evolution in gameplay since EQ, UO, DOAC, ect. I get more freedom and immersion from text based muds than I do from the current crop of MMORPGs.
It's time for the Smedley's, Ropers, WoW's ect, to move on. It's time to try things more differntly. WoW will not last forever.
There have been some improvements, but they are only bits and pieces. We need the whole package. For example the character creator in City of Heroes/Villians and Champions Online is truly incredible, unfortunately the games themselves are very shallow. Why can't we have this in a high fantasy setting built on player interaction and player freedom?
I would also love to see a random stat generator for new characters in an MMORPG, like original D&D. There needs to be some variance so that every single player is not exactly the same.
I've been spending a lot of time in Vanguard again just for freedom. Yeah, it's still a themepark but the world is open, I can go grind or quest in countless places at any level, I can build boats and houses, I can parley with kings, etc. etc.
I would also love to see a random stat generator for new characters in an MMORPG, like original D&D. There needs to be some variance so that every single player is not exactly the same.
This is a bad idea. If players start with random stats, most players are just going to keep rerolling until they get a character that passes a certain stat threshold. If I want to play a fighter, I'm going to keep rolling until I get 18 strength and a fairly decent constitution and dexterity, for example. So you add an extra level of tedium to character creation and at the end of it, everyone is still pretty much the same.
so? too much freedom makes a bad game. i dont see the need of all those freedoms in games.
I dont see evidence that too much freedom makes a bad game. All I see is evidence that bad design (i.e. lack of tools) around the existance of freedom makes a bad game.
That all depends on what the "freedom" allows the bad acters to do. Personally, I'd consider it an example of Bad Design, if it allows ganking and/or griefing. Its not a "lack of tools" thats the problem. Its more a "lack of experience with human nature" that results in many design flaws, and results in a lack of player retention. Rather few people are going to hang around to be others punching bags, when there are so many other options that do not require that.
You have to have both.
Its only knowing player nature that you will develop tools around it.
In real life we have tools to deal with gankers, in games we dont. The human nature is still the same. In real life people care about their personal/public image, in game they dont. Well, we give them tools to start caring about their public image as well.
I think you're missing the point. First, most people want to play the game. Whether or not they can "take care of the gankers" by setting traps, etc, isn't the point. The point is, they don't want to spend their time dealing with griefers. That's not why they play the game. They aren't combat-oriented people. It doesn't matter if you're telling them to enter combat or spend their time protecting themselves from combat. That's not what they're there for.
Second, yes, that is more like real life. If real life had no real consequences, which is what essentially releases everyone's inner douche. But the main point is, we deal with crap in real life because we have to. In a virtual world, if I'm being oppressed or annoyed, I can just pull the plug and leave. And people will.
I think you are missing the point. People are not actually playing today's games. Most people are dead tired of it already. The whole point is people having to interact, giving them tools for that is the pre-requisite. People are there to interact, thats where the genre structures itself. What it lacks is ability for people to interact, they often find themselfs limited by the lack of tools.
In virtual world, if you are being oppresed or annoyed you quit because you reached the bottleneck of the design. Would the game be designed to allow people to interact with whatever annoys them, they would just deal with it using the tools at their disposal.
Someone playing Super Mario would quit the game because at some point they fall into a hole. But if the designer gave them the ability to jump across the hole, they would keep playing. The same thing. You are saying that people would RATHER NOT PRESS JUMP, AND QUIT RIGHT AWAY.
People would not quit right away, they would try things, ask for help. Even if they quit, at some point they would discover what idiots they were "dude, your trolling the game, but it is your fault because all you had to do was JUMP". And in the game, people would be informed about the jump "tool" alongside many of the other tools.
Comments
You are not limited to a profession in freedom, you can do multiple things. You can be hybrid, just as in real life one person can be a lifeguard, gymnast, and a doctor all in the same day. That is the real world, in the real world we are not limited to " one job" "one skill" You have the chocie to only do pvp or pve, no one would be stopping you. Apparently you haven;t played many non class based games. LOL
You can still stand there and fix all the weapons you wish if you want to do that for a profession, there would be a balance. Of course the better weapons would need to be repaired, but it could be your choice to use a weapon that doesn't. That is what player freedom is all about.
Please show me a flawless law enforcement system, I have never seen one in any game I have played, so I would love for you to show me that one exists. LMAO @ flawless.. some games have made 12 year old kids moderators...
ALL law enforcement systems are human run in the end.
I don't want to be hybrid, but I still want to do all the things a hybrid can do. That sounds like a huge inconvenience getting in to the way of me having fun.
I want to use the weapon that needs to be repaired because I think it looks cooler and has better stats, but the game is limiting my freedom because I need to go repair it afterwards, which I don't want to. That's not fun.
a) Freedom
b) Convenience
Choose one.
I'm talking about certain law enforcements which are build into the gameplay.
Eg: in WoW , you have sanctuaries , pvp-free zones , etc... In a game you would like it would be up to the players to make sure no one pvp's in such areas. GL with that.
Or in EvE, in high sec concord gets in . Or in low sec you lose security standing which can have pretty bad consequences , these are flawless systems. And no players would ever be able to enforce rules like NPC's / game mechanics do .
And moderators are there for a totally different reasons. And in your kind of game moderators will still be necessary .
Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt.
Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.
Hmm, have to throw in a shameless plug here.
Our game, X-Shift, will have a player and NPC run legal system. Players will be able to report crimes, be cops, use forensics and investigative techniques to eventually find the criminal.
"Safe" areas are more heavily patrolled by NPC cops, while seedier areas aren't patrolled by them at all.
There are fines and jail time, and... a certain treat for the truly violent. Or, you could of course, not report to the police and just talk to your powerful friends in the mob.
No, its not absolute freedom. Something has to protect the players who simply don't want to be in a combat-centric environment. In fact, X-Shift is deliberately not focused on combat. However, I do agree that a game world shouldn't be perfect, or sugar-coated either.
I call BS on that argument, freedom enhances convenience, not the other way around. Instead of having to ever go to another NPC again, you can have a stack of weapons that you go through and then you can fix them all yourself when you want to. Then you do not have to stop at all when your weapon breaks, you can fight for extended periods and not worry about it.
Actually I discussed the need for zoning earlier in this thread. YOu can have a balance between freedom and imposing on others freedoms. You can choose to go to pvp zones, or not. But if your in a pvp zone, you should expect to pvp. LOL
Now I have heard in wow the " law" system has been abused and is very faulty. People have tried to ban guild leaders to try and make them lose wars and such, and it is ridiculous how these systems can be abused, and how players can be banned without any evidence present at all.
The OP wants a pure sandbox.... pure sandboxes are not fun for 99% of the people. The other 1% are just the griefers that get kicks out of people quitting the game because they are not "hardcore" enough or the people who want to fish all day.
Then they cry why companies don't bother with sandboxes....
Hmm wonder why?
But , pvp zones and non pvp zones... Thats against freedom that is being preeched. So you agree there are restrictions needed?
That law system you talk about is not the NPC/game mechanics law system. Thats the last resort moderator/gm law system. Which any game have and will always have . No moderators and GM's? Hackfest here we come!
Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt.
Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.
So I can only prolong the inevitable inconvenience which will be even more of an inconvenience with so many weapons to fix at once?
Sure is nice for you to make workarounds for me but when all is said and done it would be much more convenient for me if NPC's repaired my stuff, or rather if there was no durability, I could teleport anywhere I want anytime I want and get straight to the action all the time (= my fun) without having to go through unnecessary inconveniences like traveling.
Everything should be sold by NPC's and towns would be compact hubs where everything was readily available in a small area. That's almost as convenient as it gets, but there is no freedom.
You can call BS on the argument (which you obviously do, because there are no flaws in your utopistic world of freedom), but you are only making up temporary workarounds for very real issue; the convenience is gone, no matter how you try to fix it and keep freedom intact.
a) Freedom
b) Convenience
Choose one.
Of course there are some restrictions needed, as I stated in my earlier posts on this thread. Complete freedom isn't practical or even possible in any programmed world. However, the unneccessary limiting of player freedom in games these days is sucking the fun and life out of the genre.
Of course on any game you must have security, I am talking about mutes and bans for in game activity not related to account hacking and 3rd party RMT. Most of the player abuse report systems are ggreatly flawed and it would be a good alternative to have a player run court with in game consequences for players found guilty rather than just muting them, or temporary banning them. Player report systems are usually used against the victims rather than the perps due to their design.
Having mods as judges and players as jury would not only add content, it would have greater player interaction in the process. a Player would have the opportunity to provide a defense for themselves prior to having a decsion made.
I want the freedom of the convenience to fix my own weapon and never have to go to an npc again. I made my choice.
And then you take away freedom from someone else for the sake of -your- convenience.
What you want is a game that gives -you- the freedom to do whatever -you- want to do while taking away the freedom from everyone else.
I stand by my words. You can't get both.
Well yes i would like that to. but i would also like there to be NPC's to repair things i cannot. So what we can conclude is that Hybrid wins. Let the players be able to repair certain things themselves through certain proffessions/skills but also give the options for NPC's to repair items (the best would be for NPC repairs to be slightly more costly )
Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt.
Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.
Nonsense.. utter NONSENSE.
You lose nothing. Nothing at all. You can go to the same area where you would have had an NPC repairing items and have a player do the same thing. I have played games with player crafting, and the way it works is players themselves deisgnate an area that players go to repair weapons for other players, just as you would have an npc do it for you, in fact the places where players usually go to repair items are the places where items are in the most need of repair, that is how it works in a player system. Silly. Player crafting systems are MORE convenient than NPC systems due to the fact that players can relocate to the areas needed most. NPC's do not.
I have already had both, and it works great. Have you?
Oh, I don't think so.
Let's say a game has an NPC that fixes weapons. The devs make it so that it is of a certain cost. They also give dedicated crafters the ability to do the same thing.
Those who want to use the NPC can and those who want to work on their crafting and their weapon fixing abilities can do so.
Just like I refuse to craft. ever. hate it hate it hate it.
so I buy from players or NPC's. However, there are players who love crafting. They would rather work up the skill and do it for themselves.
More power to them.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Yeah, because an NPC run economy is just so much better for the crafter than actual player run economy. That's a big part of the appeal of crafting- that you can affect the economy with it, sell your goods to different people, not just for yourself.
Just working up the skill is a small part of the appeal. Interaction is important.
Either you do it conveniently (NPC run economy), or give more freedom to the player to do what he wants (player run economy).
I agree that a system that has both is a good system. The NPC prices higher than that of players, but allow players to have the option to be able to do all repairs themselves if they so choose. Though from what I have seen in games that do just that , the NPC areas wind up becoming ghost towns because the players are handling it much better.
Whether pure 100% balance is truly attainable or not is inconsequential. Failure to strive towards that goal will result in shallow uninteresting gameplay.
It'd be like if our justice system was like "pure 100% justice isn't attainable, so let's not even try!" The results would be terrible!
As a more general reply to the thread, games require constraints to be interesting:
The Tetris player with the freedom to reject pieces he does not like (removing them from play) will end up with a less fun/interesting Tetris game.
The Chess player with the freedom to move Pawns in any direction will end up with a less interesting Chess game.
The Poker player with the freedom to draw as many cards as he wants to build his hand will end up with a less interesting Poker game.
Games are not fun without rules. Without contsricting players' freedom, games simply cannot exist in any entertaining fashion.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think Interesting has it exactly right. The MMORPG industry needs a shot of fresh blood and new ideas (or old ideas brought back), and above all player freedom - while keeping the origins of MMORPG's in mind and why we play them. We want to get immersed in another world. Not a world of scripted events, stats, and numbers chaining players to a predictable path of dungeon a,b,d,c,d,e ect. There has absolutely been a de-evolution in gameplay since EQ, UO, DOAC, ect. I get more freedom and immersion from text based muds than I do from the current crop of MMORPGs.
It's time for the Smedley's, Ropers, WoW's ect, to move on. It's time to try things more differntly. WoW will not last forever.
There have been some improvements, but they are only bits and pieces. We need the whole package. For example the character creator in City of Heroes/Villians and Champions Online is truly incredible, unfortunately the games themselves are very shallow. Why can't we have this in a high fantasy setting built on player interaction and player freedom?
I would also love to see a random stat generator for new characters in an MMORPG, like original D&D. There needs to be some variance so that every single player is not exactly the same.
I've been spending a lot of time in Vanguard again just for freedom. Yeah, it's still a themepark but the world is open, I can go grind or quest in countless places at any level, I can build boats and houses, I can parley with kings, etc. etc.
We really do need more freedom, though.
This is a bad idea. If players start with random stats, most players are just going to keep rerolling until they get a character that passes a certain stat threshold. If I want to play a fighter, I'm going to keep rolling until I get 18 strength and a fairly decent constitution and dexterity, for example. So you add an extra level of tedium to character creation and at the end of it, everyone is still pretty much the same.
I think you are missing the point. People are not actually playing today's games. Most people are dead tired of it already. The whole point is people having to interact, giving them tools for that is the pre-requisite. People are there to interact, thats where the genre structures itself. What it lacks is ability for people to interact, they often find themselfs limited by the lack of tools.
In virtual world, if you are being oppresed or annoyed you quit because you reached the bottleneck of the design. Would the game be designed to allow people to interact with whatever annoys them, they would just deal with it using the tools at their disposal.
Someone playing Super Mario would quit the game because at some point they fall into a hole. But if the designer gave them the ability to jump across the hole, they would keep playing. The same thing. You are saying that people would RATHER NOT PRESS JUMP, AND QUIT RIGHT AWAY.
People would not quit right away, they would try things, ask for help. Even if they quit, at some point they would discover what idiots they were "dude, your trolling the game, but it is your fault because all you had to do was JUMP". And in the game, people would be informed about the jump "tool" alongside many of the other tools.
Open your eyes, start trying.
The Freedom you describe died with SWG, 'nough said.
If everyone copied UO instead of EQ you would have already had your freedom.