Warmaster also simply assumes that travel equates to only moving from point A to point B with no impediment or possible other points of interest along the way. Maybe in a very static and linear game this is true. If the game makes the travel interesting it can be enjoyable.
Best case scenario? Travel breaks even with the amount of gameplay variety in typical MMORPG gameplay.
The actual reality? Travel is a big empty nothing 90% of the time.
Even in games people claim are "dynamic", travel is still a big empty nothing 90% of the time.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Warmaster also simply assumes that travel equates to only moving from point A to point B with no impediment or possible other points of interest along the way. Maybe in a very static and linear game this is true. If the game makes the travel interesting it can be enjoyable.
Best case scenario? Travel breaks even with the amount of gameplay variety in typical MMORPG gameplay.
The actual reality? Travel is a big empty nothing 90% of the time.
Even in games people claim are "dynamic", travel is still a big empty nothing 90% of the time.
Currently there is very little variety in typical mmorpg gameplay due to how little they've focused on actual game worlds partly due to this attitude of "been there, done that" which is fueled by poor world design to begin with. Development teams get off easy when they aren't pressured to make an involving, living world and, in turn, we all end up with far more shallow experiences. Also, I love the statistics you made up off the top of your head in regard to how vapid mmo travel is.
Warmaster also simply assumes that travel equates to only moving from point A to point B with no impediment or possible other points of interest along the way. Maybe in a very static and linear game this is true. If the game makes the travel interesting it can be enjoyable.
Best case scenario? Travel breaks even with the amount of gameplay variety in typical MMORPG gameplay.
The actual reality? Travel is a big empty nothing 90% of the time.
Even in games people claim are "dynamic", travel is still a big empty nothing 90% of the time.
Currently there is very little variety in typical mmorpg gameplay due to how little they've focused on actual game worlds partly due to this attitude of "been there, done that" which is fueled by poor world design to begin with. Development teams get off easy when they aren't pressured to make an involving, living world and, in turn, we all end up with far more shallow experiences. Also, I love the statistics you made up off the top of your head in regard to how vapid mmo travel is.
There is also one thing that made travels interesting, and that is the lack of a GPS. You had to orient yourself and read maps, I mean real maps printed from a website, and ask people, yes people, for directions. Of course if you have a GPS, following an arrow can be boring.
Currently there is very little variety in typical mmorpg gameplay due to how little they've focused on actual game worlds partly due to this attitude of "been there, done that" which is fueled by poor world design to begin with. Development teams get off easy when they aren't pressured to make an involving, living world and, in turn, we all end up with far more shallow experiences. Also, I love the statistics you made up off the top of your head in regard to how vapid mmo travel is.
The reason they "get off easy" is they focus on putting the gameplay in other parts of the game. And it works.
It's certainly possible to create a game where travel is where all the gameplay is -- but I certainly haven't seen one yet unless you count Puzzle Pirates.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Sometimes though, I want to get to my destination a little faster. Much faster. The built-in spell mechanic of UO, mark/recall was very useful.
You can have both in any game.
I'm an explorer, too. But I don't at all enjoy long travel times. I enjoy big worlds with paths that go off in different directions; off the beaten path from the main questline. Perhaps I'm taking your travel time comment too literally, but travel time is something ENTIRELY different from exploring. Making somebody spend 20 minutes at a time going from town to town, IMO, actually DISCOURAGES exploring. "I spend ENOUGH time just trying to get from point A to point B. I don't have time for taking the road less traveled."
I've seen few MMO's where you didn't have to travel on foot to a place before you were able to quick travel back. That's because exploring is about discovering new places, not running along the same road for the 40th time. So, most games DO have both. I could be wrong, but the OP seems to think this is unacceptable.
Really, how can someone sit here and think that game devolpers put in long travel times for any other reason? it adds nothing to the gameplay, especially when you have a map.
That was a big part of the discussions in designing the game world for Lord of the Rings Online, and the reason they went with a more compact world than some players were expecting. They wanted to releasea world where there was always something of interest as the player travelled, so instead of creating a large world with filler content, they opted for a smaller world design so that players wouldn't simply be travelling through emptiness or arbitrary content.
Just as with WOW, Vanguard and other mainstream MMOs, as the playerbase matured , more travel paths were added in order to reduce the amount of time the player is spending going through 'used' content or regions they have already experienced.
And I think Turbine got it just about right. Seems like everywhere you go, there's something cool to take a screenshot in front of. A finely sculpted world in contrast to SWG, with 15 square km, 80% of which looks to be randomly generated landscape.
As a scout or ranger in Pre-cu SWG, you would leave the city with basic supplies and walk out into the wilderness for days at a time, when you ran into someone you would stop and chat, or invite them to use your crafted campsite so they would be protected from animal attack whilst they rested out there. If you struck lucky you might find a rare creature lair or resource.
The journey was the whole point.
Travel might be a timesink but then it's a computer game, you are playing them because you haven't got anything real to do, so they all all timesinks. If like me you want your timesink to be a virtual world then the timesinks are varied and not just combat based eg. Teleport in, clear dungeon, teleport out, rinse and repeat.
Man those were good times. MCH/Ranger here and you're spot on, it was the journey that was meaningful. Nowadays, gamers want everything handed to them and they want it now. Back then we were happy with a virtual world, not anymore. It's all about purple phat lo0tz and grinding. They want it fast and with the least amount of effort possible.
It's just so sad and ridiculous.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Sometimes though, I want to get to my destination a little faster. Much faster. The built-in spell mechanic of UO, mark/recall was very useful.
You can have both in any game.
I'm an explorer, too. But I don't at all enjoy long travel times. I enjoy big worlds with paths that go off in different directions; off the beaten path from the main questline. Perhaps I'm taking your travel time comment too literally, but travel time is something ENTIRELY different from exploring. Making somebody spend 20 minutes at a time going from town to town, IMO, actually DISCOURAGES exploring. "I spend ENOUGH time just trying to get from point A to point B. I don't have time for taking the road less traveled."
I've seen few MMO's where you didn't have to travel on foot to a place before you were able to quick travel back. That's because exploring is about discovering new places, not running along the same road for the 40th time. So, most games DO have both. I could be wrong, but the OP seems to think this is unacceptable.
Long travel time is a subjective idea. I think before everyone started giving the pros and cons of lengthier travel we all should have come to some reasonable agreement as to what constitutes a lengthy trip. It's a bit late for that but perhaps I can better clarify my position. I'm with you in that I consider myself more the explorer type but in my mind an explorer is seeking the "road less traveled" (<3 RF). I'm by no means a fan of completely empty terrain that goes on and on! Ideally, I'd like to see a game world where every player didn't find every location, at least not initially, so points of interest shouldn't always be only 50 ft from the roadside (much like LoTRO). I think to enable more meaningful exploration, where you may end up actually asking a real person where something is, we need worlds that are more spread out and less linear to provide more mystery and adventure instead of bland, barren expanses.
I prefer long travels in a sandbox game where you aren't constantly being pushed towards new content. In themepark games I tend to find long travels to be unnecessary timesinks. That's not to say I want to travel aroundi nstantly. I just don't want to spend a signifcant chunk of time hopping zeppelins to get somewhere.
Earlier in the thread, somebody posted that they were really enjoying Skyrim, but if they had the choice, the dungeons and critters wouldn't be so spread out, and there wouldn't be whole areas with virtually nothing in them. Then I remembered the thread on the Bethesda forums about the planned mod that was meant to make the Skyrim world bigger, so that the dungeons and critters wouldn't be so "unrealistically" close together ! 0.o
I guess long travel times are good if they serve a purpose. If your scout has to go and roam the wilds for a few hours to track and kill a very rare stag, or to find a rare spawn of mushrooms, then it is purposeful (assuming the spawns are not static, of course). But if you have to run for 25 minutes to get to a quest objective and then all the way back again, that's just a waste. In this example, the hunter gets something unique while using his particular skills, the questor gets 25 mins of downtime before he can use his particular skills, and then another 25 on the way back.
If the long travel time is used to make resources scarce, then subjecting yourself to that long travel time is optional, and it can be avoided easily. But if the travel time is used to make a quest more "difficult", then it becomes suspect.
Modern MMO's seem to be moving away from large, open-world areas, toward smaller, focused action areas. I doubt you could fit an old skool "long travel time" in any of those
But if you have to run for 25 minutes to get to a quest objective and then all the way back again, that's just a waste. In this example, the hunter gets something unique while using his particular skills, the questor gets 25 mins of downtime before he can use his particular skills, and then another 25 on the way back.
Not if that 50 minute journey is interesting because it is challenging and requires planning, e.g you cannot just 1 shot your way though mobs to rush to your next quest that you want to power through (xp per hour is everything he says!!). He also levels while he kills mobs while using his skills on route, in conjunction with a bit of gatherering,exploring and artifact hunting. Ah good old days sigh
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
But if you have to run for 25 minutes to get to a quest objective and then all the way back again, that's just a waste. In this example, the hunter gets something unique while using his particular skills, the questor gets 25 mins of downtime before he can use his particular skills, and then another 25 on the way back.
Not if that 50 minute journey is interesting because it is challenging and requires planning, e.g you cannot just 1 shot your way though mobs to rush to your next quest that you want to power through (xp per hour is everything he says!!). He also levels while he kills mobs while using his skills on route, in conjunction with a bit of gatherering,exploring and artifact hunting. Ah good old days sigh
Exactly. A journey is only long and boring if you only do one thing and that's at the end of the journey. Back before all the quick travel got added to DAoC, people could never understand how I leveled so quickly. I killed on the way to my target and back from, instead of avoiding everything I could and back then you had to be careful where you fought things too.
What's interesting is that by the very nature of making this engaging wonderful travel experience one is actually reducing travel times. Basically, everyone wants shorter travel times except the one or two people that want to walk for the sake of walking, and at that point it's masochism on their part and has nothing to do with game design.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
What's interesting is that by the very nature of making this engaging wonderful travel experience one is actually reducing travel times. Basically, everyone wants shorter travel times except the one or two people that want to walk for the sake of walking, and at that point it's masochism on their part and has nothing to do with game design.
The only reason people don't want to travel is because developers shoved all the players and content into the cities.
What's interesting is that by the very nature of making this engaging wonderful travel experience one is actually reducing travel times. Basically, everyone wants shorter travel times except the one or two people that want to walk for the sake of walking, and at that point it's masochism on their part and has nothing to do with game design.
The only reason people don't want to travel is because developers shoved all the players and content into the cities.
The problem is all about the game design.
+1.
Everyone doesn't want shorter travel times, some of us really wants a better game design.
What's interesting is that by the very nature of making this engaging wonderful travel experience one is actually reducing travel times. Basically, everyone wants shorter travel times except the one or two people that want to walk for the sake of walking, and at that point it's masochism on their part and has nothing to do with game design.
The only reason people don't want to travel is because developers shoved all the players and content into the cities.
The problem is all about the game design.
+1.
Everyone doesn't want shorter travel times, some of us really wants a better game design.
The question is, how close do the events have to be in travel to make people okay to travel? Clearly 20 minutes is too long, What about 10? 5?
What's interesting is that by the very nature of making this engaging wonderful travel experience one is actually reducing travel times. Basically, everyone wants shorter travel times except the one or two people that want to walk for the sake of walking, and at that point it's masochism on their part and has nothing to do with game design.
The only reason people don't want to travel is because developers shoved all the players and content into the cities.
The problem is all about the game design.
+1.
Everyone doesn't want shorter travel times, some of us really wants a better game design.
The question is, how close do the events have to be in travel to make people okay to travel? Clearly 20 minutes is too long, What about 10? 5?
In my modest opinion, the main focus of this issue falls right here in these 4 posts.
Travel times plus world exploration are surely linked to the game design itself. The perspective one should follow here is the arbitrary or random leadpoints the game provides to the player.
If the player is lead across the map, whether by quest given design, or by logical path progression, then travelling across the map is no more than another step in the ladder one must climb in order to eventually progress in the game. Here, long travels make no sense at all.
If the player is given a world to explore, a map where the direction you should take is not linear, whether by being presented with multiple choices/paths to follow, world map design, game lore choices, multiple starter areas, classes limitations, character development, etc etc, then i want the map traveling to be hard and non linear.
This is of course subjected to the players perspective and personal taste. If a player wants to blitz across the content and map, then he should look for a game with compatible design. The same thing for players that like world exploration.
I dont want to be pressing on old wounds here, but i played WoW for a couple of years. I dont play it anymore because i dont like the path Blizzard chose to go since TBC came out, and WoTLK and Cataclysm were for me the end of it, but i am not ashamed to say its the best game i ever played and the best online experience i had.
Long travels and world map exploration were a big part of this game at Vanilla time. The game design allowed for players to have access to a random set of events that could make you go West instead of going East, North or South. The choices presented were not the same for all races, and even if you turned out to be doing the same quests and exploring the same areas after your 3rd or 4th character, you knew that maybe you havent seen it all, you felt that there was a good chance you may have not seen it all already.
i could make this a wall of text, but in order to finish i just want to say that this is one more of those factors subjected to a players point of view but, and for me, i dont want to be lead across the map, i dont want it to be linear and i want to be lost in the map, i want to type in general chat "im lost, anyone knows where is the ogre with the quest?", i want the travel to a city i must go to be hard and making me feel that i should ready myself for the road ahead...
...oh well...call me "Indy" but i love to watch the story unfold to my decisions...
Clerigo, I think you would have really liked Asheron's Call. Getting to a new city was often an adventure in itself. I think you're character's arrival at the beseiged Fort Tethana or their discovery and exploration of the Veseyan Islands would have been some really memorable experiences for you.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Currently there is very little variety in typical mmorpg gameplay due to how little they've focused on actual game worlds partly due to this attitude of "been there, done that" which is fueled by poor world design to begin with. Development teams get off easy when they aren't pressured to make an involving, living world and, in turn, we all end up with far more shallow experiences. Also, I love the statistics you made up off the top of your head in regard to how vapid mmo travel is.
The reason they "get off easy" is they focus on putting the gameplay in other parts of the game. And it works.
It's certainly possible to create a game where travel is where all the gameplay is -- but I certainly haven't seen one yet unless you count Puzzle Pirates.
While it certainly not where all the gameplay, travel is a huge part of EVE's gameplay, and a very strategic one at that.
Longer travel times can make for more interesting game play, but like many mechanics has been poorly implemented in the past rendering it distasteful in many players eyes
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
What's interesting is that by the very nature of making this engaging wonderful travel experience one is actually reducing travel times. Basically, everyone wants shorter travel times except the one or two people that want to walk for the sake of walking, and at that point it's masochism on their part and has nothing to do with game design.
The only reason people don't want to travel is because developers shoved all the players and content into the cities.
The problem is all about the game design.
+1.
Everyone doesn't want shorter travel times, some of us really wants a better game design.
The question is, how close do the events have to be in travel to make people okay to travel? Clearly 20 minutes is too long, What about 10? 5?
In my modest opinion, the main focus of this issue falls right here in these 4 posts.
Travel times plus world exploration are surely linked to the game design itself. The perspective one should follow here is the arbitrary or random leadpoints the game provides to the player.
If the player is lead across the map, whether by quest given design, or by logical path progression, then travelling across the map is no more than another step in the ladder one must climb in order to eventually progress in the game. Here, long travels make no sense at all.
If the player is given a world to explore, a map where the direction you should take is not linear, whether by being presented with multiple choices/paths to follow, world map design, game lore choices, multiple starter areas, classes limitations, character development, etc etc, then i want the map traveling to be hard and non linear.
This is of course subjected to the players perspective and personal taste. If a player wants to blitz across the content and map, then he should look for a game with compatible design. The same thing for players that like world exploration.
I dont want to be pressing on old wounds here, but i played WoW for a couple of years. I dont play it anymore because i dont like the path Blizzard chose to go since TBC came out, and WoTLK and Cataclysm were for me the end of it, but i am not ashamed to say its the best game i ever played and the best online experience i had.
Long travels and world map exploration were a big part of this game at Vanilla time. The game design allowed for players to have access to a random set of events that could make you go West instead of going East, North or South. The choices presented were not the same for all races, and even if you turned out to be doing the same quests and exploring the same areas after your 3rd or 4th character, you knew that maybe you havent seen it all, you felt that there was a good chance you may have not seen it all already.
i could make this a wall of text, but in order to finish i just want to say that this is one more of those factors subjected to a players point of view but, and for me, i dont want to be lead across the map, i dont want it to be linear and i want to be lost in the map, i want to type in general chat "im lost, anyone knows where is the ogre with the quest?", i want the travel to a city i must go to be hard and making me feel that i should ready myself for the road ahead...
...oh well...call me "Indy" but i love to watch the story unfold to my decisions...
Yes, there should be no leading from this city to that city, same for all people. The player should pick their direction and travel that way meeting engaging content.
If your goal is to isolate players from each other, then yes, you should have very long, boring travel times with monsters that are difficult to get through if you're by yourself. Then your goal of keeping the elves in the elf cities and the dwarfs in the dwarf cities will be achieved.
However, if your goal is to actually get players together without making them angry, then you should have travel times that make sense. For instance, a quest that takes your elf to the human city (or the dwarf city). Give the elf something to do along the way and they'll work their way over to the human city. Once there, give them the option of taking the train back. Heck, give them the option of taking the train either way, but give bonuses to the players who do it the hard way.
If you create barriers in the game that require more time or effort than the players want to give, they'll go someplace else. Then the game loses money, more players and it will never fund the development of further games.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
If your goal is to isolate players from each other, then yes, you should have very long, boring travel times with monsters that are difficult to get through if you're by yourself. Then your goal of keeping the elves in the elf cities and the dwarfs in the dwarf cities will be achieved.
However, if your goal is to actually get players together without making them angry, then you should have travel times that make sense. For instance, a quest that takes your elf to the human city (or the dwarf city). Give the elf something to do along the way and they'll work their way over to the human city. Once there, give them the option of taking the train back. Heck, give them the option of taking the train either way, but give bonuses to the players who do it the hard way.
If you create barriers in the game that require more time or effort than the players want to give, they'll go someplace else. Then the game loses money, more players and it will never fund the development of further games.
This is somewhat addressed in my strategy. All the players being at the same starting point and society expands outward from there. Players have the option of travelling far away to start a personal, or large or small group settlement as part of their roleplaying, for instance a wizard living alone in a tower in the wilderness, or a mages guild, or a rangers guild or something. But you can stay near the heart of the world, which many players will probably choose to do and have access to most services. This not only makes travel totally voluntary to a degree but allows for localized markets and multi sized cities. Further with the monster spawning system I use its not a near starting city is weak and further travel is progressively dangerous, there are regions of all difficulty levels all over the world. If a player group wants to hide their base in a far away incredibly dangerous area they can, and there is no necessity for other players to travel there if they don't want to. I feel like the gated content system of games like WoW and the way that farther areas are generally progressive in difficulty and even the standard roguelike distance equals danger system which were chosen for the ease of content management in all types of rpg design are a major part of what is holding back travel as a part of the game. Its all about more options and freedom.
Sure some people want a teleporting dungeon finder system, but they can play WoW. Since I don't want to make huge bank I don't have to change the game to appease the masses. I don't think there is anything wrong with WoW style games, I would just also like to play other kinds of games at the same time.
I think that most sandboxers and themepark traditionalists don't want to smash WoW per say, they just want to be able to play WoW and also play a game with different core mechanics. We can all coexist peacefully.
Everything that takes time and you repeat more than once is a timesink. Slow travel is only a small cog in the machine that drives a successful virtual world. Many including myself want this, so where you see sneering devs, I see devs providing quality. Horses for courses though.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Long travel does not make sense any more in modern gameplay, than, say: having the only combat actions of a player being auto-attack, taunt, slam, and kick. However, having an expansive virtual space to explore without restrictionis very important and something that needs to be better incorporated into modern games.
Comments
Best case scenario? Travel breaks even with the amount of gameplay variety in typical MMORPG gameplay.
The actual reality? Travel is a big empty nothing 90% of the time.
Even in games people claim are "dynamic", travel is still a big empty nothing 90% of the time.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Currently there is very little variety in typical mmorpg gameplay due to how little they've focused on actual game worlds partly due to this attitude of "been there, done that" which is fueled by poor world design to begin with. Development teams get off easy when they aren't pressured to make an involving, living world and, in turn, we all end up with far more shallow experiences. Also, I love the statistics you made up off the top of your head in regard to how vapid mmo travel is.
There is also one thing that made travels interesting, and that is the lack of a GPS. You had to orient yourself and read maps, I mean real maps printed from a website, and ask people, yes people, for directions. Of course if you have a GPS, following an arrow can be boring.
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
The reason they "get off easy" is they focus on putting the gameplay in other parts of the game. And it works.
It's certainly possible to create a game where travel is where all the gameplay is -- but I certainly haven't seen one yet unless you count Puzzle Pirates.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I'm an explorer, too. But I don't at all enjoy long travel times. I enjoy big worlds with paths that go off in different directions; off the beaten path from the main questline. Perhaps I'm taking your travel time comment too literally, but travel time is something ENTIRELY different from exploring. Making somebody spend 20 minutes at a time going from town to town, IMO, actually DISCOURAGES exploring. "I spend ENOUGH time just trying to get from point A to point B. I don't have time for taking the road less traveled."
I've seen few MMO's where you didn't have to travel on foot to a place before you were able to quick travel back. That's because exploring is about discovering new places, not running along the same road for the 40th time. So, most games DO have both. I could be wrong, but the OP seems to think this is unacceptable.
And I think Turbine got it just about right. Seems like everywhere you go, there's something cool to take a screenshot in front of. A finely sculpted world in contrast to SWG, with 15 square km, 80% of which looks to be randomly generated landscape.
Man those were good times. MCH/Ranger here and you're spot on, it was the journey that was meaningful. Nowadays, gamers want everything handed to them and they want it now. Back then we were happy with a virtual world, not anymore. It's all about purple phat lo0tz and grinding. They want it fast and with the least amount of effort possible.
It's just so sad and ridiculous.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Long travel time is a subjective idea. I think before everyone started giving the pros and cons of lengthier travel we all should have come to some reasonable agreement as to what constitutes a lengthy trip. It's a bit late for that but perhaps I can better clarify my position. I'm with you in that I consider myself more the explorer type but in my mind an explorer is seeking the "road less traveled" (<3 RF). I'm by no means a fan of completely empty terrain that goes on and on! Ideally, I'd like to see a game world where every player didn't find every location, at least not initially, so points of interest shouldn't always be only 50 ft from the roadside (much like LoTRO). I think to enable more meaningful exploration, where you may end up actually asking a real person where something is, we need worlds that are more spread out and less linear to provide more mystery and adventure instead of bland, barren expanses.
I prefer long travels in a sandbox game where you aren't constantly being pushed towards new content. In themepark games I tend to find long travels to be unnecessary timesinks. That's not to say I want to travel aroundi nstantly. I just don't want to spend a signifcant chunk of time hopping zeppelins to get somewhere.
One man's mead is another man's poison.
Earlier in the thread, somebody posted that they were really enjoying Skyrim, but if they had the choice, the dungeons and critters wouldn't be so spread out, and there wouldn't be whole areas with virtually nothing in them. Then I remembered the thread on the Bethesda forums about the planned mod that was meant to make the Skyrim world bigger, so that the dungeons and critters wouldn't be so "unrealistically" close together ! 0.o
I guess long travel times are good if they serve a purpose. If your scout has to go and roam the wilds for a few hours to track and kill a very rare stag, or to find a rare spawn of mushrooms, then it is purposeful (assuming the spawns are not static, of course). But if you have to run for 25 minutes to get to a quest objective and then all the way back again, that's just a waste. In this example, the hunter gets something unique while using his particular skills, the questor gets 25 mins of downtime before he can use his particular skills, and then another 25 on the way back.
If the long travel time is used to make resources scarce, then subjecting yourself to that long travel time is optional, and it can be avoided easily. But if the travel time is used to make a quest more "difficult", then it becomes suspect.
Modern MMO's seem to be moving away from large, open-world areas, toward smaller, focused action areas. I doubt you could fit an old skool "long travel time" in any of those
Not if that 50 minute journey is interesting because it is challenging and requires planning, e.g you cannot just 1 shot your way though mobs to rush to your next quest that you want to power through (xp per hour is everything he says!!). He also levels while he kills mobs while using his skills on route, in conjunction with a bit of gatherering,exploring and artifact hunting. Ah good old days sigh
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Exactly. A journey is only long and boring if you only do one thing and that's at the end of the journey. Back before all the quick travel got added to DAoC, people could never understand how I leveled so quickly. I killed on the way to my target and back from, instead of avoiding everything I could and back then you had to be careful where you fought things too.
What's interesting is that by the very nature of making this engaging wonderful travel experience one is actually reducing travel times. Basically, everyone wants shorter travel times except the one or two people that want to walk for the sake of walking, and at that point it's masochism on their part and has nothing to do with game design.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
The only reason people don't want to travel is because developers shoved all the players and content into the cities.
The problem is all about the game design.
+1.
Everyone doesn't want shorter travel times, some of us really wants a better game design.
The question is, how close do the events have to be in travel to make people okay to travel? Clearly 20 minutes is too long, What about 10? 5?
In my modest opinion, the main focus of this issue falls right here in these 4 posts.
Travel times plus world exploration are surely linked to the game design itself. The perspective one should follow here is the arbitrary or random leadpoints the game provides to the player.
If the player is lead across the map, whether by quest given design, or by logical path progression, then travelling across the map is no more than another step in the ladder one must climb in order to eventually progress in the game. Here, long travels make no sense at all.
If the player is given a world to explore, a map where the direction you should take is not linear, whether by being presented with multiple choices/paths to follow, world map design, game lore choices, multiple starter areas, classes limitations, character development, etc etc, then i want the map traveling to be hard and non linear.
This is of course subjected to the players perspective and personal taste. If a player wants to blitz across the content and map, then he should look for a game with compatible design. The same thing for players that like world exploration.
I dont want to be pressing on old wounds here, but i played WoW for a couple of years. I dont play it anymore because i dont like the path Blizzard chose to go since TBC came out, and WoTLK and Cataclysm were for me the end of it, but i am not ashamed to say its the best game i ever played and the best online experience i had.
Long travels and world map exploration were a big part of this game at Vanilla time. The game design allowed for players to have access to a random set of events that could make you go West instead of going East, North or South. The choices presented were not the same for all races, and even if you turned out to be doing the same quests and exploring the same areas after your 3rd or 4th character, you knew that maybe you havent seen it all, you felt that there was a good chance you may have not seen it all already.
i could make this a wall of text, but in order to finish i just want to say that this is one more of those factors subjected to a players point of view but, and for me, i dont want to be lead across the map, i dont want it to be linear and i want to be lost in the map, i want to type in general chat "im lost, anyone knows where is the ogre with the quest?", i want the travel to a city i must go to be hard and making me feel that i should ready myself for the road ahead...
...oh well...call me "Indy" but i love to watch the story unfold to my decisions...
Clerigo, I think you would have really liked Asheron's Call. Getting to a new city was often an adventure in itself. I think you're character's arrival at the beseiged Fort Tethana or their discovery and exploration of the Veseyan Islands would have been some really memorable experiences for you.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
While it certainly not where all the gameplay, travel is a huge part of EVE's gameplay, and a very strategic one at that.
Longer travel times can make for more interesting game play, but like many mechanics has been poorly implemented in the past rendering it distasteful in many players eyes
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Yes, there should be no leading from this city to that city, same for all people. The player should pick their direction and travel that way meeting engaging content.
If your goal is to isolate players from each other, then yes, you should have very long, boring travel times with monsters that are difficult to get through if you're by yourself. Then your goal of keeping the elves in the elf cities and the dwarfs in the dwarf cities will be achieved.
However, if your goal is to actually get players together without making them angry, then you should have travel times that make sense. For instance, a quest that takes your elf to the human city (or the dwarf city). Give the elf something to do along the way and they'll work their way over to the human city. Once there, give them the option of taking the train back. Heck, give them the option of taking the train either way, but give bonuses to the players who do it the hard way.
If you create barriers in the game that require more time or effort than the players want to give, they'll go someplace else. Then the game loses money, more players and it will never fund the development of further games.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Pretty cool huh, i find it to be exciting
This is somewhat addressed in my strategy. All the players being at the same starting point and society expands outward from there. Players have the option of travelling far away to start a personal, or large or small group settlement as part of their roleplaying, for instance a wizard living alone in a tower in the wilderness, or a mages guild, or a rangers guild or something. But you can stay near the heart of the world, which many players will probably choose to do and have access to most services. This not only makes travel totally voluntary to a degree but allows for localized markets and multi sized cities. Further with the monster spawning system I use its not a near starting city is weak and further travel is progressively dangerous, there are regions of all difficulty levels all over the world. If a player group wants to hide their base in a far away incredibly dangerous area they can, and there is no necessity for other players to travel there if they don't want to. I feel like the gated content system of games like WoW and the way that farther areas are generally progressive in difficulty and even the standard roguelike distance equals danger system which were chosen for the ease of content management in all types of rpg design are a major part of what is holding back travel as a part of the game. Its all about more options and freedom.
Sure some people want a teleporting dungeon finder system, but they can play WoW. Since I don't want to make huge bank I don't have to change the game to appease the masses. I don't think there is anything wrong with WoW style games, I would just also like to play other kinds of games at the same time.
I think that most sandboxers and themepark traditionalists don't want to smash WoW per say, they just want to be able to play WoW and also play a game with different core mechanics. We can all coexist peacefully.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Long travel does not make sense any more in modern gameplay, than, say: having the only combat actions of a player being auto-attack, taunt, slam, and kick. However, having an expansive virtual space to explore without restriction is very important and something that needs to be better incorporated into modern games.