Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Dangit Jim, I'm a doctor not a...
ArchAngel102
Member Posts: 273
Why not have these in a MMO-- and then some? Joking aside, here is my proposed idea.
1) NPC's live and breathe in the world. They live and die, act and build. These NPC's are crucial, as they help determine the power of a town/civilization, and NPC's war with each other. Healthy, living, high-resourced NPC's will have stronger Armies. RvR in the game is loaded with NPC's who play a big part in that as well, even if players are much stronger. NPC's are like player's pets, but with a mind of their own (or GUIDED by players in RvR)
2) These NPC's get sick. Players may or may not (I don't know if it's a good idea to "Curse" or give a Player a permanent sickness. Perhaps as opposed to permadeath, players get "terminally ill" and must seek a doctor like the NPC's.
Regardless-- although there are NPC doctors, Player doctors are much better and much more common. So what happens? PC's who die, and Npc's (normally) get sick or mortally wounded, and must seek out a doctor, in a living world.
3) These Player Doctors set up shop in a town/city, at a healer's house. They perform "crafting" on players to repair them. The point of including NPC's in this, is to give the players more to do. Players can actually be doctors, be going around curing sick NPC's and players. This is in an effort to be part of the "Realm" in which players align themselves with.
Comments
I've always wanted to see this in a slightly different form. If players can build cities of their own, and if their production skills can lead to them hiring "underlings" for greater/faster production, and players basically control this giving them more input in the world and aspects to play with. Sort of like having aspects of Ages of Empires or Civilization on a smaller scale, linked more to a player's shop or "house". As well as for cities on the larger scale (guards, healers, etc. and temples, warehouses, marketplaces, etc.) run by players who get elected by the citizens.
Once upon a time....
Great ideas
I think combining genres is amazing in MMORPG's.
Imagine the MMORPG genre combined with RTS, Turn based city building, dynasty warrior style npc armies, etc.
*drools*
Someday - hopefully in my lifetime anyway we will see a MMO that incorporates "freedom" in terms of cities built by players, run by players and possibly NPCs aswell. Be a fantasy/sci-fi world come to life where everything is persistently changing with governments, wars, players themselves and so forth.
But like i said someday in someones lifetime we could see something. Im hoping ill still be capable of playing games when im old
- my fear!
I think for an MMORPG, there's need to be limits and not go whole hog into the strategy game, otherwise you have a strategy game.
I think you'd want it to still be centered around the player's character(s). So smaller numbers for the player, larger for the cities (which are run by a player community through elections and requirements of group actions so one player can't ruin things on a whim).
So:
a Crafter character can hire workers with skills less than their own skill
anyone can hire a few guards for their home or castle, depending on the ability to pay and support them (food, armor, etc.)
Priests characters can hire special guards devoted to that cult
Builder craftsmen can hire construction crews of lesser skill than their own, needing to support them like guards are, and use them in conjuction with other Builder players for major projects, where they'd stay at it for turn based time periods
Shop owners can hire Merchants to buy and sell things for them while they are offline
Warrior types can hire NPC fighters and lead them into battle like "Pets", grouping to form large armies, or hire out as part of Caravan protection
etc.
In other words, keep it limited in numbers by requirements for support and maintenance, so as to not have players soloing entire communities themselves. And give the ability to join players in large scale efforts, so as to foster community.
Once upon a time....
Oh yes definitely! My idea was that the NPC's would perform the strategy game aspects.
But instead of player-owned cities, player-owned housing, etc. it would be Realm (Community) owned everything. There would be Factions/Realms at war with one another (2-4 realms) and each realm focuses on pride for its own realm.
And the "leaders" would all be NPC's. I know this takes a lot of out the "player-run, player-governed" aspect, but it gives more control to the world and less to players who would possibly (inevitably) ruin the game or community. Also, players can't be in the game world 24/7. At max, they can be there 18 hours a day, or more realistically [x] hours a week. For a real, living world to work, it would need players who would be there 24/7 (NPC's).
The beauty of my design is that players don't need to "hire" npc's (although they certainly can) but instead they "convince" npc's to start a new project, OR grab help from them to finish a project already started. NPC's would be the core of everything-- requiring the player to "convince" the mayor of a town to build a [player's desired building] at location [player's desired location]. The Mayor says yes or no based on the town's Needs & Resources, which scale. (The more of the same building the town has, the less and less likely it'll be approved).
This prevents players from spamming the world with useless garbage, or having 342 blacksmiths but only 2 mines. In my design, players use crafting and harvesting primarily to help the NPC's, who buy their products. They can, use it to sell their own goods to other players...BUT it's irrelevant! All trade is done via the Marketplace of each town, and the NPC's set the costs as well. Players get a %, while the Merchant gets a %. The player can, however, become the merchant, and get 100%-- and have NPC's come into his shop to buy products. So the player CAN hire hirelings, but he does so (although not limited to) for the Realm, not just players themselves.
2) Guards are hired or recruited to protect towns, which are community based, but in essence it's the same thing. A player makes a town his town. There are different factions per realm (Such as the Humans have Outlaw Pirates, King's Guards, Academy Wizards, etc.)
3) Builder are indeed important! In my design, there are not only permanent buildings, but that same skill can allow players to construct quick-buildigns such as a guard tower, to protect an objective. The difference is that permanent ones can't be destroyed unless sieged, while pvp-skill of building-- anyone can destroy the tower or fountain.
4) Yep! Warrior's like pets. Merchants (players or NPC's) hire mercenaries (players or npcs) to help them take large amounts of goods across the world. But only NPC's wage wars, although players can technically hire NPC's to form their own army if they were rich enough. This would be INCREDIBLY expensive though.
Good idea, OP.^^
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I guess it sounds pretty fun if the game have a good AI.
Only company that could pull something like that off is Bethesda, they did have NPCs act pretty smart in Morrowwind and Oblivion.
It doesn't work in a game with magical healers and resurection though. Otherwise you just rez any townie who dies. and with a fast heal it would kinda take away the point.
But a medic is a great idea, I like the idea as well with a combat system without heals whatsoever, where you have no combat heal and the medic patch you up fast so you are ready for the next fight, with the right combat system I think that would be a lot more tactical and fun than a healer.
Of course in that case would the medic either have to be a secondary proffession or they would have some special combat skills as well so you don't have a class that is useless while you fight but you still need her between the battles.
Giving it a little more thoughts, the system would be perfect for a game that uses guildcities, some slightly more advanced version of what AoC have.
There you would need those NPCs to mine metal for your guildsmiths, farm for you leather crafters and alchemists, work in the player owned shops as clerks, protect the city from intruders and all other stuff that you need in a town. Anything that is a really boring grind that players shouldn't bother with, and the more healthy npcs you have the better morale and more resources for crafting do the guild get.
You know, we could actually turn this into a pretty awesome system.
Wow, it's as if you've read my game design :P
Yep! The game includes a no-healing policy (there is regen, but it's about as powerful in combat as a Bard's regen song in modern MMORPG's; i.e. not very) as well as no resurrection for Population.
I have dabbled in character death (a CHANCE at % permadeath) which would force-accompany a faster progress system (no levels, and quick progress) as well as obtaining a PERMANENT form of progression (bank items, currency, some skill points via keeping a % OR having a separate permanent form of skill point progression that is capped at 40% of max skills, which players can always start their characters at this permanent form of skill point progression).
NPC's suffer 100% permadeath. Players would suffer perhaps a <10% chance, in addition to a possible to suffer "mortal wounding" if they do not die, which would require the doctor.
The medic/doctor would definitely be a secondary profession, as the design has no classes but instead skill points. Also, the role of medic/doctor might be entirely separate from the Player Characters-- perhaps in the form of playing AS a npc doctor, instead of progressing your own Hero with a doctor skill. This is in addition to any NPC doctor in the towns/villages.
Actually-- it would be more realistic to NOT have every NPC's suffer 100% permadeath, but to actually suffer a % permadeath, but a % to suffer mortal wounding, which requires a player to heal them or else they DO die. This allows player who love being doctors (entire guilds actually) to rush to a town after it has been defeated, to heal all of the wounded. Just like in real life.
Most people don't die, they are actually just injured.
Also, the game will be FREE 2 PLAY no matter what, with an item shop. This is better in EVERY way to a subscription game IMO, especially in a game where freebies have less power and can't effect the world as much.
It's also cheaper for the majority of players, as a non-overpriced F2P game with an item shop tends to actually be cheaper for most players than $15 a month. And those who want to sub, can sub for $15/month normal, gaining all of the features.
This is the wave of the feature, and IMO better because F2P brings in tons of freebies for P2P players to slaughter. Because honestly, a lot of F2P people will suck compared to those veterans of MMO's (who would be much more likely to P2P).
I think it's a great idea. A game with permadeath (low, gentle, permadeath) where death isn't that big of a deal-- but the game is also free to play. With a possibility of a lower % of permadeath for paying subscribers.
I think this is a MUST. A game with permadeath (it's actually more like Skill Loss) would HAVE to become free 2 play until it is more accepted and enjoyed by MMO society. And if people don't like it? They can let the game die and fail, losing $0 for trying it out.
Also, my team is incredibly small, so I am thinking of keeping prices very low, because I really don't need very much money to make everyone on the team happy and improve the game. I don't believe in milking addicts dry just so I can hump more $1 bills in a diamond plated swimming pool.
Sounds fun. I rather not have permadeath because of technical resons, lag and crashes makes the whole idea bad. Maybe in the future.
So that leaves a reason why the players should be rezzed but not the general population. Maybe you could let them end up in hades and have to escape, be judged by one of the gods to return or something similar. Maybe several of those things randomly. It would make sense.
Or you could have some other reason, like the adventurer gets their sould bound to something and cant stay dead as long as the artifact is whole. Maybe a medallion they were, the altar of a good or some kind of infernal machine.
I do like the idea that you could have a crafter as an alt to craft for your character, your guild and do other similar stuff. I would actually make more sense than learning loads of crafts on your warrior, and you could make some non combat stuff for those characters to do as well. As long as you can make it fun to play but optional I think it would work very fine.
Thank you for your opinion!
Right now, we have put Dungeons on the backburner to focus on the Living World as well as implementing Trade (Harvesting, Crafting, Merchants, Doctors, side games, etc.) because we feel Trade is far more important in a Living World than Dungeons.
Dungeons will most likely have to come in an expansion---if at all. I know I know, that sucks... but a company only has so many resources and has to prioritize based on the game design, and the Living World is a pretty big deal and a rather big advertising feature, so players might be satisfied without Dungeons to explore, as long as they had a living world to explore.
A thought: Charge a dollar when someone dies instead to rezz them, or allow them to rezz with a loss of skills (enough to hurt). Either allow them 3 rezzes for that or the rest of the day free. Then charge for more than a few character slots and stuff like extra storage space and fluff.
Games that sells actual good items tend to turn fast into buy2win.
Sounds fun otherwise
You can make a great game without dungeons, Guildwars added their in GW:EN, 4 years after launch.
If the game is fun people will play, dunegeons or no dungeons. Besides, only a madman would build a dungeon, who not just bury your gold instead?
Building miles of rooms and corridors, renting in monsters, I mean it would cost most of that treasure anyways.
LOL! Good point! :P
In my game design, every monster is actually a player (or npc). So any race/monster in the game is actually just the other Realm's characters (PC or NPC).
We actually aren't purposefully skimping on the monsters...but it's definitely something we don't have to worry about! Freeing up resources to go towards the rest of the game.
I mean...there ARE some monsters that are entirely NPC (Dragons, for example) but those are all Bosses or SubBosses, unique to each Realm.
I think that'll be fun... every now and then a "Boss" great beast will emerge, assisting an NPC army as it heads to conquer more land. This makes for not just a big RvR battle...but one with a Dragon Raid involved!
Hell... maybe I'll even let players be the Dragons :P It would have to be a contest... or perhaps it'll be an incredibly expensive part of the game ($50 for a Dragon Token!) to help pay for the fact everyone else is playing for free. Nah... I'll probably make it an INCREDIBLY rare drop, so players can sell them in game, or just find them as loot, and go off to play.
Or I will greatly tone down the power of the Dragons, and make the item spawn more common (although still rare).
ArchAngel102, Can you tell us more about your game? I don't have a lot of faith in Indies, but I think it's possible under the right circumstances.
Some questions;
You say "we", how many people are working on it, full time?
Art? 2D or fully 3D? What style (realism, cartoony, etc.)?
Experience?
Financial backing?
Might have more questions later.
Just a comment. If you're successful at all, you'll have expenses to keep it running. FtP is a huge turn off for me, and likely more and more gamers, because it ends up being a Pay-to-Win setup. Would you consider a FtP but if you want to own land to build on you need to subscribe...and NO CASH SHOP ever?
Once upon a time....
I have almost finished our (the game's) website and will be posting it shortly. I am lead developer, but I have a different person working on the website (or else it would already be up by now...lol...) as I am extremely passionate and comitted to the game.
To avoid answering your questions (the website will eventually answer most of those) I feel the most important answer the community needs is that the game will be 2.5D, similar to Ultima Online's or Diablo's dimensions.
I fully realize that F2P means costs, but the F2P model is actually more profitable than the Subscription model, by a large margin. This is what the current market shows anyway.
I want to address the most important issue though: the cash shop and "pay to win" model. I set out to make this video game as a lover of MMORPG's which I have been devoted to for over a decade. I will not have a "pay to win" model in my game. This has been my dream for over a year in development, and I will not see it ruined. However, I do not object to "pay to win" models as long as the cap is at $15/month and every who "pays" $15/month is equal. I will not do this though, but did want to mention that side of the argument. I am aware of what you mean though, as some games allow players to pump out hundreds of dollars a month to become more powerful than others. This is disturbing to me as a gamer and a developer. I do not want to take advantage of people or their wallets. I want to make a high quality video game. This philosophy of quality over greed leads to a more successful game, which inadvertantly leads to more money, which truly isn't my goal.
However... F2P means there must be a cash shop to pay for both the server infratructure and the employees involved. There is no way around this. Players cannot expect a MMO which is entirely free in every way, having no one paying the bills.
There is no land to build, but a "community" of land, based on which of the 4 realms one belongs to. However, your idea to only allow Subscribers to "convince" NPC leaders to give allow them to start projects on certain buildings has been considered. Freebies would play the game normally, but not be able to change the world as much as subscribers. This is not decided though, as the game is still early in development. It won't release any time soon.
The Cash Shop is instead going to allow players to purchase or unlock certain aspects of the game. Along with a Living World, there are a plethora of player races to pick, which are all unlockable via the cash shop or subscription. Along with more Races, players can purchase Monster Points which allow them to play as NPC's which have a set skill amount and 1 life. This is NOT in addition to an NPC in the Living World, but to play AS one who is currently alive. This is for players who don't want to risk the loss of their PC main character, or who enjoy playing the game but don't enjoy the RPG progress part of it.
Fortunately, everything one can buy in the Cash Shop can be obtained in the game for free. The Cash Shop is for impatient players who want to spend the extra $ to have easier access to some of the more interesting Races, or to pay to play the MMO+Action part of the MMORPG. Progress is not bought, but playing as an NPC who is already in the world (who would be attacking you anyway) is allowed. We also have an idea for "Boss Tokens" which allow players to play as Bosses in PvP Dungeons (which are PvE dungeons, where the Players play as the monsters, so direct PvEvP). However, dungeons are on the back-burner, so this may not happen.
The game is very intricate in design, so explaining what role Monster Points and NPC's have in the game is quite difficult. You can find more information in other threads of mine.
This is all speculation though, as we have to (nearly) finish the game before deciding what we sell, how we sell it, and how it is also obtained in game for freebies.
Don't fret though, as the first part of our marketing plan is to actually release "demo" multiplayer versions of our game. These will be cheap ($5) demo's but are full standalone games, so that players can not only invest into the rapid production of the game, but also receive a full game (albeit short game) that is multiplayer (but not massively). This also creates hype as well as we will be using all of the funds to speed up the process to see the game become released.
We have a lot of innovation, and releasing cheap "demos" of the game allows us to show off some of the cool features, and if players like our game as much as they claim in our research, the demos will hype the small community enough to spread the news to create a big community, and thus a more successful game.
I could see a dragon metamorphis buff you could get or buy in the itemshop. But you kinda need good and evil dragons then like in Dragonlance. It is actually pretty fun idea.
But you need to be careful, with both PvP and dragon tokens it could go out of hands when suddenly and entire faction makes dragons to wipe out the other side.
Maybe you could make it as a token that breaks when the player dies 8but not log off, that would make people angry if they get linkdead for some reason or if the server go down) but only allow one or 2 dragons for each faction at the same time?
Or something like that, the more dangerous the dragon are the rarer they need to be. And don't forget to have them drop dragon scales for crafters when they die.
Good idea.
Yes, we will be limiting the amount of Rare Races, SubBosses, and Bosses allowed in each Battlefield.
Although the game is not instanced, the "population" of the world is "realistic" in that players cannot enter certain areas as a [Dragon] if there are already too many [Dragons] in that area. Also, these Dragons are limited and restricted to be only in and around the Battlefield, and if they leave the battlefield the NPC AI takes over again (or they are not allowed to leave a set area). This area does move along with the NPC (and thus PC) army.
Basically, players will have to wait and constantly check on the "Dragon Population" until it rises from 0 to 1+ before they are able to absorb their token and begin playing as a Dragon. And if no one absorbs a token after [time] then an NPC dragon spawns and the Invasion occurs normally.
Unless of a Common Race; Players can only load into an area if there is open population for their Civilization (Orc, Goblin, Lizardman, etc.) Otherwise they have to spawn somewhere else and travel the distance (and it is possible to bring with them civilians of their race, by embarking on a Settler Adventure, which raises the population of the surviving Settlers in the town, allowing players of that newly settled race to spawn there).
Settler Adventures are very fun-- as one may start off leading 20 Lizardman, only to arrive at the town with 5, lol. Players receive more reward the more who survive, as these Settlers pay out once they get there.
Kind of like how in WW2 Online, they have trucks which are mobile spawn points, where players can begin spawning in if there is a truck. Just more static and realistic.
Our goal is to have a world (and only one server) big enough where there is always an Invasion occurring somewhere in the world with little waiting time inbetween.
And if there are no invasions occurring, players may set off invasions by questing (the more quests they do, the closer they come to an Invasion)
Invasions are where NPC armies march out to war, and the fun begins.
Otherwise, RvR is entirely skirmished, or through PvEvP (indirect PvP where players try to out-quest each other).
There is an entire section of the design for PvE players who do not want to PvP, but through PvE can directly affect PvP. Such as by buffing up the NPC's, who in turn (later) go off to PvP. There are PvE quests that take place in safe zones, as well as enemy zones.
And all "You can't go in this zone" is explained through Commands from the King of each Realm. And the idea is that the realms are all so tied together in Community (because of the inherit dangers of the other realms) that they never dare to oppose one another. That is why every building is "Realm Owned" instead of Player Owned housing.
It's an interesting concept. I'll keep an eye out for more information.
I'm not keen on, or maybe I should say I'm not sure what to think of, the idea of taking away from the individual character. Talking about housing and direct control of hirelings, etc. But I'll check into things when you get your site up.
Once upon a time....
I still like the idea of NPC's getting sick and requiring healing, and permadeath for NPC's, who if they don't die they get "mortally wounded" and require healing from a player, or else they do die.
Nice dream, but nonetheless a dream. servers could not manage that much advance AI in a single game, not yet tho. F2P makes me sick tho, it opens the door to mutli accounts and mass ganking.
Respawnable ressources would not have to be if you really want to play the realisitic game truly. So war for ressources would be an open idea. If you put limited ressources you need a way to recycle old ressources like remelting weapons to reforge new ones.
I think Shadowbane was real close to what you want in your dream world, you could build wherever you want, build the forges, temples etc and put the according Npc in each of them. build walls and put Npc guards on it . Everything was destroyable, but Npcs respawned after a while. It is the closest to what you would like to have.
How do you know that servers could not manage that much advanced AI in a single game?
Do you work in the field of computer hardware?
I really would like to know how you "know" this is impossible.
It could work with a combination of MMO and RTS game mechanics, with significant alterations to both. But game developers lack imagination, interest, and any sense of vision.