I love the idea of the world evolving and things happening even if I'm not there and when I log in I find new or changed things. But, unlike most players today, I like immersion, not 15 minute dungeon runs for worthless epics.
Ultima VII remains the game with the best virtual world I've seen that isn't player-controlled. Skyrim is the closest game I'm aware of to this, as it's also heavily inspired by it in terms of virtual world design. While it lacks the completely seamless world of Ultima VII, it has dynamic NPC routines (although not as detailed) and interactivity with lots of things in the game world.
I'd love to see an MMO use some of the same techniques Ultima VII used.
As a big "simulated world" guy, my take is that there's still quite a viable market for it, but not at the kinds of insane budget levels that MMOs have reached. It would essentially be an MMO that catered towards the MMO aficionado, rather than the more casual player, and it would be premised on the notion that the game would be unpredictable.
That means that it would have to be built for way less money than MMORPGs tend to cost today, and you the players would have to be accepting of a way lower graphical and content bar than what you are currently used to (since that is what the budget buys you).
I am unsure that you (the generic you, the group of all MMO players) is actually willing to make that compromise right now. Like, some have suggested that I Kickstarter a spiritual sequel to UO and SWG. But to do those to today's standards would involve raising tens of millions of dollars.
Sim-based worlds are cheaper to make than content-heavy sandboxes, I think, by quite a lot. But they also usually call for custom graphics and server engines, because the stuff that is out there is entirely based around the idea of static data. So there's a sizable barrier to entry right off the bat.
As a big "simulated world" guy, my take is that there's still quite a viable market for it, but not at the kinds of insane budget levels that MMOs have reached. It would essentially be an MMO that catered towards the MMO aficionado, rather than the more casual player, and it would be premised on the notion that the game would be unpredictable.
That means that it would have to be built for way less money than MMORPGs tend to cost today, and you the players would have to be accepting of a way lower graphical and content bar than what you are currently used to (since that is what the budget buys you).
I am unsure that you (the generic you, the group of all MMO players) is actually willing to make that compromise right now. Like, some have suggested that I Kickstarter a spiritual sequel to UO and SWG. But to do those to today's standards would involve raising tens of millions of dollars.
Sim-based worlds are cheaper to make than content-heavy sandboxes, I think, by quite a lot. But they also usually call for custom graphics and server engines, because the stuff that is out there is entirely based around the idea of static data. So there's a sizable barrier to entry right off the bat.
Whenever I go back to UO, I do not mind the 2D client, but their are many that it does bother. My main hangup with UO now is the new design/skill combos, not the graphics.
Maybe with the new developmental cycle being more focused on verying degrees of sandbox content to go along with themepark content, people will be more open to sandbox content. With this, and the success of some games like minecraft, maybe the targeted audience will grow and money will become more available as a result to make the type of game you are talking about.
I think over instancing is sucking the soul out of mmos.
Whenever I go back to UO, I do not mind the 2D client, but their are many that it does bother. My main hangup with UO now is the new design/skill combos, not the graphics.
Maybe with the new developmental cycle being more focused on verying degrees of sandbox content to go along with themepark content, people will be more open to sandbox content. With this, and the success of some games like minecraft, maybe the targeted audience will grow and money will become more available as a result to make the type of game you are talking about.
I think over instancing is sucking the soul out of mmos.
I do not believe that throwing money at it will somehow grow the market for it. There are plenty of sandboxes, and even Virtual worlds of various types and while there is certainly a market, its not an overly large one. EqNext I feel is just smart marketing. When the market is as oversaturated as this one currently is, you design for a tight core and hold them. Its risky, but its worked in the past.
You log in, your avatar is in the world, created by the developer. The world around has not changed since you last logged in and you pick up from where you left. Everything or vast majority of things in the world that you are able to interact with has not changed, is still available, or has not developed and is highly unlikely to do any of that in extended period of time. If there is something dynamic, it is in the players, their locations, advancement, communities and interactions.
You log in, you avatar is in the world, created by developer. The world around has been modified and developed by other players and there is high chances that you might not be able to continue from where you left. It is likely that a piece of content that was enabling you to perform an act has changed in a manner that requires you to adapt and react. Majority of the valuable pieces of the developer offered content can be interacted with or modified. If you would stay aware from extended periods of time, you might come back to a game that has changed so drastically that it forces you to learn its rules and situation again. Along side of the player interaction dynamics, the world itself is in dynamic changes within its perimeters.
Games like: Greed Monger, Darkfall, Starforge, ArcheAge, EVE Online, Mortal Online, Perpetuum, Ultima Online, SWG
The above are Static Virtual Worlds, and the lower are Dynamic Virtual Worlds, or "Living" as OP calls them.
This is the 1st distinction you'll have to make. The OP's question has absolutely nothing to do with the game type's on the 1st list. Those games are Virtual Worlds yes, but as static environments, they are merely multiplayer games with repeatable content. They are not "simulating life", nor by any means "living".
You should for heavens sake stop mixing these two sub genres with each other, even if they fall under the category of MMORPG. They are always fundamentally un-comparable: their economies and game mechanics are based on completely different theorem. It is not a question about PVE/PVP, Instances or not, Crafting or not. These two categories are simply defined by the dynamic nature and persistency of effects of human interaction in the virtual world - and lack of thereof.
DAoC - 00-06 - And every now and then WoW - Online since launch - and now back again. EVE - Online since 07 - and still on, and on, and on.. WHO - Online 08-10 LOTR-O - Online 06-08 Also played : Asherons Call, EverQuest, EQ2, Dungeons & Dragons, Cabal, Dark & Light, GW, GW2, LA2, Ryzom, Shaiya, SWG, Allods, Forsaken World, ArcheAge, Secret World, Darkfall, Rift, ESO, Tera.
The first thing that come to my mind when I saw the title is Ryzom... Such a great - and underrated- game.
Sandbox MMORPGs that are not very well-known but definitely worth a look:
Ryzom, Haven and Hearth, Xsyon, The Repopulation, UO private shards, Mortal Online, Darkfall 1 remakes (New Dawn or Rise of Agon), RPG MO, Project Gorgon, EQ: Sanctuary (custom server)
Whenever I go back to UO, I do not mind the 2D client, but their are many that it does bother. My main hangup with UO now is the new design/skill combos, not the graphics.
Maybe with the new developmental cycle being more focused on verying degrees of sandbox content to go along with themepark content, people will be more open to sandbox content. With this, and the success of some games like minecraft, maybe the targeted audience will grow and money will become more available as a result to make the type of game you are talking about.
I think over instancing is sucking the soul out of mmos.
I do not believe that throwing money at it will somehow grow the market for it. There are plenty of sandboxes, and even Virtual worlds of various types and while there is certainly a market, its not an overly large one. EqNext I feel is just smart marketing. When the market is as oversaturated as this one currently is, you design for a tight core and hold them. Its risky, but its worked in the past.
I don't see where I said to throw money at something and it will grow, or if that was just a thought. Everyone likes to say themeparks were being made, because that's where the market is, and the development cycle is now throwing in more sandbox, so people with money must think its good to have more of it right now.
How many peoples first mmo was WoW? Now how many of those people went on to buy/play other mmos? So if 'x' number of people decide they like their themepark to have more sandbox in it, I do not see how that would not open the door for a mmo like Raph talks about being looked at a little more seriously.
You need to keep your eye on EverQuest Next. They just teamed up with StoryBricks. StoryBricks is working hard to bring worlds to life including one thing you mentioned about the heart attack. NPCs will have lives. They will have lives outside of the player interaction with them and that will influence how they interact with you, the quests they give, the reward they give, even the information they give. I know I am a FanBoy with high hopes, but seriously keep an eye (even if just a lazy eye) on EverQuest Next. What you are describing is a lot of stuff they have hinted at. Because I as started to read your post all I could think of is that EverQuest (the original up until Luclin) felt very much like the closest thing that has been presented, maybe UO to challenge. I love virtual worlds where there is more to the game than combat or even progression in general.
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
Nah .. the virtual is no longer a central part of the gameplay for many MMOs, and that is just fine.
Aside from world pvp battles, like PS2, i have yet to see a game where a persistent virtual world add compelling fun. If you just want to meet, greet & chat, a lobby or a city is just as fine.
PvE adventures is about small groups and you don't need a persistent world to do so. In fact, too many people showing up spoils the fun.
You are everything that is wrong with the MMORPG world. It is people like you that are ruining MMOs for people like me who have enjoyed them since EQ1. Why do you even need a game to be an MMO, what you want is a coop game with matchmaking. People like you keep blending MMORPG and SP w/Co-op. All that does is ruin and soil MMORPGs. How I wish WoW never existed and MMOs were virtual world oriented and persistant and group oriented still. You, Nariusseldon, and people like you, have ruined my MMORPG experience, possibly for good.
An MMORPG is a persistant world in its original nature. It was not till WoW that instancing and automated matchmaking became the norm. Remember when you actually had to represent your character well in order to make friends in order to find great parties in order to spend hours on end in a virtual world shared and beloved by thousands of others? If I want a instanced dungeon crawler, i'll log on Borderlands or the such.
MMORPGs are not about just meeting greeting and chatting. They are about exploring a world (a world is by nature persistant) together and living together in it. When you explore this world, do you not ever feel the need to return to a familiar place again? I have seen Washington DC multiple times because I enjoy it. Has the layout changed in the past decade? No. But I return to see what trouble I can get into with new friends there. Same thing in MMOs. I don't want to see something, kill something, click something and never see it again. That's not much of a world...in fact thats more like a primitive side scroller that got a 3d make-over.
/endRant
I know more people out there will hate my views than like, but to those who share this passion of true MMORPGs, I hope we find a home again, and one that does not get tainted by the mass appeal like all have since.
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
When SP RPG players thirst for good story , epic lore and being solo hero to save the world.
MMORPG players dream about living virtual world.
But there are no MMORPG out here offer them "living virtual world"
We don't know how it look like .
Everyone have difference concept about it.
So
What do you , MMORPG players think about "living virtual world"?
How it look like ?
or how to make it?
In my case
I think a "living virtual world" is a world that change through time.
Every time you log in , the world change.
Each experience you have is one time , and you never and have it again.
Since that world always change it shape.
last day it just a peaceful village , day latter , it became a ruin because of dragon attack.
Monster get wipe out after player raid or a NPC that give you quest die because heart attack (lol)
That's what i think about "living virtual world" . A virtual world that change through time.
So how to make a world like that ?
I think a god like AI like "Skynet" are out of question.
So, to make a living world , you need hand of human to help the world change.
Someone have to role as the world to make it living. (living man role as the world > living world)
And it not player job .
I want to have fun when playing , not working to created contents in seat of developers
i believe the key to design "living world" MMORPG is a design that allow the one who role as "world" can change the world and make it moving through his will.
for example
He who role as world can drop a dark dragon in town , massacre player and NPC. Created a epic quest to slay the evil dragon and bring peace to kingdom.
or
Set up difference treasure chest for dungeon.
Change monster power, or they local , even they number.
Moving NPC around to created story or kill them off if need .
Or change daily task in tavern bulletin board.
It just my option about living virtual world.
And
I wonder how you , who read this, think about "living world" of MMORPG ?
What do you think a living world or MMORPG look like ?
This sounds like you are describing about dynamic events that GW2 have, I remember where there were an invasion of the ogre you meant to hold the bases, if you fail to do so, they would take over it, and the FATE system in FF14, same with invasions, with field boss appearance, raiding villages, either you protect the villagers or it'll get in ruin.. etc *Never really seen the villages get overwhelmed in beta, there were too many people to defend every part of it to see it changes*.
You need to keep your eye on EverQuest Next. They just teamed up with StoryBricks. StoryBricks is working hard to bring worlds to life including one thing you mentioned about the heart attack. NPCs will have lives. They will have lives outside of the player interaction with them and that will influence how they interact with you, the quests they give, the reward they give, even the information they give. I know I am a FanBoy with high hopes, but seriously keep an eye (even if just a lazy eye) on EverQuest Next. What you are describing is a lot of stuff they have hinted at. Because I as started to read your post all I could think of is that EverQuest (the original up until Luclin) felt very much like the closest thing that has been presented, maybe UO to challenge. I love virtual worlds where there is more to the game than combat or even progression in general.
This sounds like a very expensive project, not to mention everytime an npc dies, another one born, meaning that the dev have to constantly design a new npcs that'll be a lot of npcs to design, or they'll have a random generated npc which you cause a lot of problem such as bugs and glitches, then again I'd love that, and definitely I will be keeping my eyes on the next EverQuest, one of the classic of its genre.
When SP RPG players thirst for good story , epic lore and being solo hero to save the world.
Good story, sure. I'll have to disagree with "being solo hero to save the world", FF XII is a perfect example of a such great RPG where you are definitely not playing the hero.
You are everything that is wrong with the MMORPG world. It is people like you that are ruining MMOs for people like me who have enjoyed them since EQ1. Why do you even need a game to be an MMO, what you want is a coop game with matchmaking. People like you keep blending MMORPG and SP w/Co-op. All that does is ruin and soil MMORPGs. How I wish WoW never existed and MMOs were virtual world oriented and persistant and group oriented still. You, Nariusseldon, and people like you, have ruined my MMORPG experience, possibly for good.
An MMORPG is a persistant world in its original nature. It was not till WoW that instancing and automated matchmaking became the norm. Remember when you actually had to represent your character well in order to make friends in order to find great parties in order to spend hours on end in a virtual world shared and beloved by thousands of others? If I want a instanced dungeon crawler, i'll log on Borderlands or the such.
What MMORPG is .. originally .. changes over time. That is called progress. I get it that you don't like it.
But MMORPGs, like any other enterainment product, is just responding to market forces. And i don't apologize for my preference. My preference is as valid as yours.
If you think MMOs is ruined for you ... there is no one to blame but yourself. You "kind" of players do not support MMO enough so that the devs will chase your group of users.
I use my entertainment products my way .. and i am not going to change that just because some random dude on the internet has a different preference.
And yes, Borderland is a great game. If MMOs are more like that .. i will play MMO more.
One great thing about SWG was that resources could be mined to the point where you couldn't mine that area anymore .
Unlike WOW where you have nodes which just refresh after X amount of time .
Minecraft is the king of sandboxes , you mine the area the resources don't come back , plant trees and they will grow . Cut them all down and you have no trees .
Make a game where you can destroy a forest to gather wood , maybe sell seeds at a vendor to replant or something if someone desides to make trees extinct
As for mining , to beable to actually mine would be great because that is changing the world . There would have to be ruleset in place so people don't destroy the entire game tho .
The more freedom in a game the more abuse appears . Some players just like to grief others for kicks .
And I don't need it in an MMORPG. Too many yahoos running around will quite simply ruin any feeling of a virtual world.
In order for it to be virtual I need some sense of what is happening is real. Unfortunately put real people in that world and what you have is complete mayhem, and not a virtual world. In fact I would be willing to bet, that in that type of situation many players would be getting their kicks simply out of harassing and ruining the game experience for others.
The biggest thing I want in an MMO is an enjoyable gaming experience that can be shared with others. I don't feel the need to change anything in the world. Just experiencing good content with other players is all I ask of an MMO. Do I care if an NPC respawns in the exact same place right after I kill him? No because I have been there and moved on.
Virtual MMO worlds might be your nirvana, but I will stick to single player or possibly coop for that experience. To me having an excess of humanity in this type of game would not be an enjoyable experience.
You're right, but there's a fix for it. Consequence. The reason there are so many asshats in games is because there is no consequence to the character being an asshat.
I propose an asshat mechanic: If you're being an asshat, you get 1 warning. Next time, you are flagged as PVP where others can full loot you, but you can't full loot others. Third time, you are perma-killed on defeat.
Thin the herd is what I say...
Seriously, if there were serious in game consequences for bad behavior, it would stop or at the very least, slow down dramatically. In the real world, there are rules that we must all live by or face the music. Why would it be any different in a virtual world?
Nah .. the virtual is no longer a central part of the gameplay for many MMOs, and that is just fine.
Aside from world pvp battles, like PS2, i have yet to see a game where a persistent virtual world add compelling fun. If you just want to meet, greet & chat, a lobby or a city is just as fine.
PvE adventures is about small groups and you don't need a persistent world to do so. In fact, too many people showing up spoils the fun.
You are everything that is wrong with the MMORPG world. It is people like you that are ruining MMOs for people like me who have enjoyed them since EQ1. Why do you even need a game to be an MMO, what you want is a coop game with matchmaking. People like you keep blending MMORPG and SP w/Co-op. All that does is ruin and soil MMORPGs. How I wish WoW never existed and MMOs were virtual world oriented and persistant and group oriented still. You, Nariusseldon, and people like you, have ruined my MMORPG experience, possibly for good.
An MMORPG is a persistant world in its original nature. It was not till WoW that instancing and automated matchmaking became the norm. Remember when you actually had to represent your character well in order to make friends in order to find great parties in order to spend hours on end in a virtual world shared and beloved by thousands of others? If I want a instanced dungeon crawler, i'll log on Borderlands or the such.
MMORPGs are not about just meeting greeting and chatting. They are about exploring a world (a world is by nature persistant) together and living together in it. When you explore this world, do you not ever feel the need to return to a familiar place again? I have seen Washington DC multiple times because I enjoy it. Has the layout changed in the past decade? No. But I return to see what trouble I can get into with new friends there. Same thing in MMOs. I don't want to see something, kill something, click something and never see it again. That's not much of a world...in fact thats more like a primitive side scroller that got a 3d make-over.
/endRant
I know more people out there will hate my views than like, but to those who share this passion of true MMORPGs, I hope we find a home again, and one that does not get tainted by the mass appeal like all have since.
Well said, Daranar, and you could add a few names to this list you are addressing (there are about four of those posters).
Add me to the list of true MMORPG enthusiast .. I wish instancing was never born in the MMO world..
When SP RPG players thirst for good story , epic lore and being solo hero to save the world.
MMORPG players dream about living virtual world.
But there are no MMORPG out here offer them "living virtual world"
We don't know how it look like .
Everyone have difference concept about it.
So
What do you , MMORPG players think about "living virtual world"?
How it look like ?
or how to make it?
In my case
I think a "living virtual world" is a world that change through time.
Every time you log in , the world change.
Each experience you have is one time , and you never and have it again.
Since that world always change it shape.
last day it just a peaceful village , day latter , it became a ruin because of dragon attack.
Monster get wipe out after player raid or a NPC that give you quest die because heart attack (lol)
That's what i think about "living virtual world" . A virtual world that change through time.
So how to make a world like that ?
I think a god like AI like "Skynet" are out of question.
So, to make a living world , you need hand of human to help the world change.
Someone have to role as the world to make it living. (living man role as the world > living world)
And it not player job .
I want to have fun when playing , not working to created contents in seat of developers
i believe the key to design "living world" MMORPG is a design that allow the one who role as "world" can change the world and make it moving through his will.
for example
He who role as world can drop a dark dragon in town , massacre player and NPC. Created a epic quest to slay the evil dragon and bring peace to kingdom.
or
Set up difference treasure chest for dungeon.
Change monster power, or they local , even they number.
Moving NPC around to created story or kill them off if need .
Or change daily task in tavern bulletin board.
It just my option about living virtual world.
And
I wonder how you , who read this, think about "living world" of MMORPG ?
What do you think a living world or MMORPG look like ?
We are getting a virtual world soon its called Star Citizen....
Add me to the list of true MMORPG enthusiast .. I wish instancing was never born in the MMO world..
Add me to the other list. I wish instancing was born earlier in the MMO world. It makes MMORPGs much better games, and i probably won't play one without.
You're already on the other list. You're an officer of the other list. You've got your name in golden calligraphy at the top of the other list. "The List of Nariusseldon" is a dread prophecy whispered amongst instance-dwelling orcs who build shrines to you in the backs of caves to inspire them in their dark rituals to bring about the ends of worlds.
You're already on the other list. You're an officer of the other list. You've got your name in golden calligraphy at the top of the other list. "The List of Nariusseldon" is a dread prophecy whispered amongst instance-dwelling orcs who build shrines to you in the backs of caves to inspire them in their dark rituals to bring about the ends of worlds.
Great. I am truly honored to be on such an esteemed list.
Now can we get back to the discussion of why virtual world is not really necessary for fun?
Comments
And football is a bigger game than hockey globally, but I would advise against going into a rink and suggesting they replace the puck with a ball.
Living in the virtual world would be fun? because you will not die, just drink potion of revival hahahaha
Or your looks will be the same you will never get old...
Ultima VII remains the game with the best virtual world I've seen that isn't player-controlled. Skyrim is the closest game I'm aware of to this, as it's also heavily inspired by it in terms of virtual world design. While it lacks the completely seamless world of Ultima VII, it has dynamic NPC routines (although not as detailed) and interactivity with lots of things in the game world.
I'd love to see an MMO use some of the same techniques Ultima VII used.
I would love to see some of Wakfu's features make it to other games.
Raph, I like you.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
Whenever I go back to UO, I do not mind the 2D client, but their are many that it does bother. My main hangup with UO now is the new design/skill combos, not the graphics.
Maybe with the new developmental cycle being more focused on verying degrees of sandbox content to go along with themepark content, people will be more open to sandbox content. With this, and the success of some games like minecraft, maybe the targeted audience will grow and money will become more available as a result to make the type of game you are talking about.
I think over instancing is sucking the soul out of mmos.
I do not believe that throwing money at it will somehow grow the market for it. There are plenty of sandboxes, and even Virtual worlds of various types and while there is certainly a market, its not an overly large one. EqNext I feel is just smart marketing. When the market is as oversaturated as this one currently is, you design for a tight core and hold them. Its risky, but its worked in the past.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
Two distinctions should make this clear
DAoC - 00-06 - And every now and then
WoW - Online since launch - and now back again.
EVE - Online since 07 - and still on, and on, and on..
WHO - Online 08-10
LOTR-O - Online 06-08
Also played : Asherons Call, EverQuest, EQ2, Dungeons & Dragons, Cabal, Dark & Light, GW, GW2, LA2, Ryzom, Shaiya, SWG, Allods, Forsaken World, ArcheAge, Secret World, Darkfall, Rift, ESO, Tera.
Ryzom, Haven and Hearth, Xsyon, The Repopulation, UO private shards, Mortal Online, Darkfall 1 remakes (New Dawn or Rise of Agon), RPG MO, Project Gorgon, EQ: Sanctuary (custom server)
I don't see where I said to throw money at something and it will grow, or if that was just a thought. Everyone likes to say themeparks were being made, because that's where the market is, and the development cycle is now throwing in more sandbox, so people with money must think its good to have more of it right now.
How many peoples first mmo was WoW? Now how many of those people went on to buy/play other mmos? So if 'x' number of people decide they like their themepark to have more sandbox in it, I do not see how that would not open the door for a mmo like Raph talks about being looked at a little more seriously.
Dear OP,
You need to keep your eye on EverQuest Next. They just teamed up with StoryBricks. StoryBricks is working hard to bring worlds to life including one thing you mentioned about the heart attack. NPCs will have lives. They will have lives outside of the player interaction with them and that will influence how they interact with you, the quests they give, the reward they give, even the information they give. I know I am a FanBoy with high hopes, but seriously keep an eye (even if just a lazy eye) on EverQuest Next. What you are describing is a lot of stuff they have hinted at. Because I as started to read your post all I could think of is that EverQuest (the original up until Luclin) felt very much like the closest thing that has been presented, maybe UO to challenge. I love virtual worlds where there is more to the game than combat or even progression in general.
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
Little forum boys with their polished cyber toys: whine whine, boo-hoo, talk talk.
You are everything that is wrong with the MMORPG world. It is people like you that are ruining MMOs for people like me who have enjoyed them since EQ1. Why do you even need a game to be an MMO, what you want is a coop game with matchmaking. People like you keep blending MMORPG and SP w/Co-op. All that does is ruin and soil MMORPGs. How I wish WoW never existed and MMOs were virtual world oriented and persistant and group oriented still. You, Nariusseldon, and people like you, have ruined my MMORPG experience, possibly for good.
An MMORPG is a persistant world in its original nature. It was not till WoW that instancing and automated matchmaking became the norm. Remember when you actually had to represent your character well in order to make friends in order to find great parties in order to spend hours on end in a virtual world shared and beloved by thousands of others? If I want a instanced dungeon crawler, i'll log on Borderlands or the such.
MMORPGs are not about just meeting greeting and chatting. They are about exploring a world (a world is by nature persistant) together and living together in it. When you explore this world, do you not ever feel the need to return to a familiar place again? I have seen Washington DC multiple times because I enjoy it. Has the layout changed in the past decade? No. But I return to see what trouble I can get into with new friends there. Same thing in MMOs. I don't want to see something, kill something, click something and never see it again. That's not much of a world...in fact thats more like a primitive side scroller that got a 3d make-over.
/endRant
I know more people out there will hate my views than like, but to those who share this passion of true MMORPGs, I hope we find a home again, and one that does not get tainted by the mass appeal like all have since.
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
This sounds like you are describing about dynamic events that GW2 have, I remember where there were an invasion of the ogre you meant to hold the bases, if you fail to do so, they would take over it, and the FATE system in FF14, same with invasions, with field boss appearance, raiding villages, either you protect the villagers or it'll get in ruin.. etc *Never really seen the villages get overwhelmed in beta, there were too many people to defend every part of it to see it changes*.
This sounds like a very expensive project, not to mention everytime an npc dies, another one born, meaning that the dev have to constantly design a new npcs that'll be a lot of npcs to design, or they'll have a random generated npc which you cause a lot of problem such as bugs and glitches, then again I'd love that, and definitely I will be keeping my eyes on the next EverQuest, one of the classic of its genre.
When SP RPG players thirst for good story , epic lore and being solo hero to save the world.
Good story, sure. I'll have to disagree with "being solo hero to save the world", FF XII is a perfect example of a such great RPG where you are definitely not playing the hero.
What MMORPG is .. originally .. changes over time. That is called progress. I get it that you don't like it.
But MMORPGs, like any other enterainment product, is just responding to market forces. And i don't apologize for my preference. My preference is as valid as yours.
If you think MMOs is ruined for you ... there is no one to blame but yourself. You "kind" of players do not support MMO enough so that the devs will chase your group of users.
I use my entertainment products my way .. and i am not going to change that just because some random dude on the internet has a different preference.
And yes, Borderland is a great game. If MMOs are more like that .. i will play MMO more.
One great thing about SWG was that resources could be mined to the point where you couldn't mine that area anymore .
Unlike WOW where you have nodes which just refresh after X amount of time .
Minecraft is the king of sandboxes , you mine the area the resources don't come back , plant trees and they will grow . Cut them all down and you have no trees .
Make a game where you can destroy a forest to gather wood , maybe sell seeds at a vendor to replant or something if someone desides to make trees extinct
As for mining , to beable to actually mine would be great because that is changing the world . There would have to be ruleset in place so people don't destroy the entire game tho .
The more freedom in a game the more abuse appears . Some players just like to grief others for kicks .
You're right, but there's a fix for it. Consequence. The reason there are so many asshats in games is because there is no consequence to the character being an asshat.
I propose an asshat mechanic: If you're being an asshat, you get 1 warning. Next time, you are flagged as PVP where others can full loot you, but you can't full loot others. Third time, you are perma-killed on defeat.
Thin the herd is what I say...
Seriously, if there were serious in game consequences for bad behavior, it would stop or at the very least, slow down dramatically. In the real world, there are rules that we must all live by or face the music. Why would it be any different in a virtual world?
Add me to the list of true MMORPG enthusiast .. I wish instancing was never born in the MMO world..
We are getting a virtual world soon its called Star Citizen....
Add me to the other list. I wish instancing was born earlier in the MMO world. It makes MMORPGs much better games, and i probably won't play one without.
Progress and innovations are great, aren't they?
You're already on the other list. You're an officer of the other list. You've got your name in golden calligraphy at the top of the other list. "The List of Nariusseldon" is a dread prophecy whispered amongst instance-dwelling orcs who build shrines to you in the backs of caves to inspire them in their dark rituals to bring about the ends of worlds.
Great. I am truly honored to be on such an esteemed list.
Now can we get back to the discussion of why virtual world is not really necessary for fun?