I hope they can find a way to add more variables to obscure the outcome. Like others said, different choices are great but I can see this leading players to external websites more than ever. Perhaps by factoring in things like player reputation, class or even race, it might help them create more variety as to the reward given. Of course, all of that takes more time for both design and asset creation, but still I can dream.
I'm not usually cynical. But I've learned to temper my enthusiasm when it comes to amazing features that are still in development. I've seen too often that they either don't work at all and get scrapped, or end up very different than described.
Persistent choice in a dialog tree? You mean like Zork, but with a list of predetermined, canned responses, not a natural language type-your-own dialog? It's a good thing, but hardly as new or innovative as some people seem to think. One attempt at a quest, please, not infinite repetition until the NPC drops the 'good' prize.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
The conversation part is intriguing, I wonder though what kind of benefits we get from chosing one path or antoher. I hope that players will be free to chose the dialogue option that fits their character's lore, instead of feeling compelled to look on some external database to get the "best reward".
The conversation part is intriguing, I wonder though what kind of benefits we get from chosing one path or antoher. I hope that players will be free to chose the dialogue option that fits their character's lore, instead of feeling compelled to look on some external database to get the "best reward".
@some-clueless-guy doesn't appear as clueless as his name suggests. Spoiler sites are the bane of game content. People *will* be opening ZAM-Pantheon and the like to find the most desirable way through any encounter, especially a dialog with an NPC that might have several exit points, with drastically different 'rewards'. Somewhere during my lifetime, the meaning of 'playing a game' has changed.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Well, those sort of sites don't ruin games like The Witcher, in which choices are far more important than they could be in an MMO. I don't think that people wanting to look up the options that suit their style the best is a bad idea, because people will be happy that there is an MMORPG where it may be worthwhile to some to worry about the choices they make, even if they use a guide to get through it.
Originally posted by Scagweed22 is it the graphics? the repetativenesses? i mean what is the point? you could be so much more productive in real life Real life brings repetition and pointlessness too. The only thing real life offers is Great graphics. Its kinda expensive too and way to dependent on the cash shop. Totally pay to win as well. No thank you. Ill stick to my games.
So, with this new questing system. Does everyone get the same multiple choices to choose from? For instance, Dodo the Paladin starts out questing, finds Kobold NPC that offers one of these progressive story arc type quests. He goes through the dialogue making sure to make all the right holier than thou responses.
Next, Beeblebrox the Cleric comes across the same Kobold NPC. Does he get the exact same dialogue? Does he get completely different dialogue? Is there a pool of random choices?
Very highly doubt it. That would seem impossible with thousands of people encountering the NPC daily.
Originally posted by Scagweed22 is it the graphics? the repetativenesses? i mean what is the point? you could be so much more productive in real life Real life brings repetition and pointlessness too. The only thing real life offers is Great graphics. Its kinda expensive too and way to dependent on the cash shop. Totally pay to win as well. No thank you. Ill stick to my games.
Their philosophy is 10/10 spot on but this idea is not a good idea or at least not the proper way to create a ROLE playing game.
I will use their example..
You hear a sound,well that is an automatic tell tale hand holding sign that you need to trigger or search for some quest or anything important to happen.We can assume important or the trigger wouldn't be there.
Perception itself is not a bad idea,but to pull it off with C+ code is really tough.I would prefer we the player to use OUR perception and NOT one built into the code.There are subtle things you can do to have we the player think twice,stop and wonder hmmmm something looks different here.Perhaps one Spruce tree surrounded by 20 Birch trees,,looks odd,maybe i better search that Spruce tree.
Personally i prefer to completely lose the idea of Quests unless they truly feel like some quest.
To me this is very much like a cheap idea adopted from GW2,a cheap quest is still a cheap quest,trying to disguise it or have it triggered does not improve it,you are still just questing and not even real questing,more still like doing fetch me or kill for me chores to attain xp.
On that same note,i cannot stand that games are giving you XP towards being a Warrior or Knight when you are doing NOTHING related to either role.Point being,i prefer to lose questing and badly implemented XP,triggers of any kind do not improve ideas.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
@Wizardry The way I read Perception is that it also cover the example you give with the 20 birch trees. Hearing a sound as a sign of something important is just an example, it could be anything that require player perception and the key is that players seek out the quests instead of quests being spoon fed to them by the game. At least this is how I read it.
This is extending on the same philosophy that eq used, where you often found something related to a quest or various hints or lore, and then it was up to the player to pursue it - I call this open ended questing. The dialog choice system described however, I am not sure how I feel about, it sound a bit .. locked, but I guess typing out stuff eq style is just a tad oldschool and I am certainly not for repeating eq at every little detail.
Their philosophy is 10/10 spot on but this idea is not a good idea or at least not the proper way to create a ROLE playing game.
I will use their example..
You hear a sound,well that is an automatic tell tale hand holding sign that you need to trigger or search for some quest or anything important to happen.We can assume important or the trigger wouldn't be there.
Perception itself is not a bad idea,but to pull it off with C+ code is really tough.I would prefer we the player to use OUR perception and NOT one built into the code.There are subtle things you can do to have we the player think twice,stop and wonder hmmmm something looks different here.Perhaps one Spruce tree surrounded by 20 Birch trees,,looks odd,maybe i better search that Spruce tree.
Until I see the Perception System in its full-functioning implementation, I am simply going to hope that this idea doesn't turn out to be just another version of ! (v.2.0). If it goes beyond an advanced version of a Quest Marker, then it could be a very good thing.
I think the first step towards breaking the traditional Quest Marker will be the introduction of the 'Red Herring' triggers. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, as Sigmund Freud so aptly said. There could be absolutely no meaning to the One Spruce among Twenty Birches; it's okay for people to invest their time trying to find a quest that isn't there. But if there are 30 places where a spruce is mixed into some birches, it may make a wonderful place for a quest. But, let's not have a static quest location. Randomize the quest location.
You hear a sound may just be environmental, wind blowing leaves in the autumn. The sound of leaves isn't the sound of a dragon's final bellow as it dies. Not every thing the character perceives should lead to a quest. If there's a 1:1 relationship between a 'perception' and a 'quest', trust me, I'll just be thinking ! (v.2.0), only it's likely to come across as !%@##$!
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Their philosophy is 10/10 spot on but this idea is not a good idea or at least not the proper way to create a ROLE playing game.
I will use their example..
You hear a sound,well that is an automatic tell tale hand holding sign that you need to trigger or search for some quest or anything important to happen.We can assume important or the trigger wouldn't be there.
Perception itself is not a bad idea,but to pull it off with C+ code is really tough.I would prefer we the player to use OUR perception and NOT one built into the code.There are subtle things you can do to have we the player think twice,stop and wonder hmmmm something looks different here.Perhaps one Spruce tree surrounded by 20 Birch trees,,looks odd,maybe i better search that Spruce tree.
Personally i prefer to completely lose the idea of Quests unless they truly feel like some quest.
To me this is very much like a cheap idea adopted from GW2,a cheap quest is still a cheap quest,trying to disguise it or have it triggered does not improve it,you are still just questing and not even real questing,more still like doing fetch me or kill for me chores to attain xp.
On that same note,i cannot stand that games are giving you XP towards being a Warrior or Knight when you are doing NOTHING related to either role.Point being,i prefer to lose questing and badly implemented XP,triggers of any kind do not improve ideas.
A tell tale sign is fine. There has to be something to give a bit of direction,I hope those signs are done with in game audio and animations. I think of Lord Of The Rings and how mythril glows when in the presence of that particular adversary. Or wandering into a ruin, then the ground beneath you begins to disturb. My issue with questing in themeparks is it is always an errand and the end is always more important than the means.
Questing in my book should have the same goal as Genuine Curiosity.
1.Which is something different happens.
2.t is noticed by whoever is close by.
3.Different people perceive it in different ways.
4.Different people choose to act or not act in a certain way.
5.The outcome is realized differently on the actions they took or not.
Genuine Curiosity is hard to feel when something is commonplace. Questing is hard to feel when something is commonplace. Even your example of the spruce tree loses it's mystery if it used to often with the same outcome. I don't think any game can achieve persistent novelty with various outcomes. What they can achieve is how things are perceived by giving traits or personalities to how different characters perceive the same events happening, and that different perception can change the flow subtly.
The conversation path things reminds me of the Scourge Of Worlds choose your own adventure movie. That could be cool, but if option A offers better incentives than B,C, or D. Some players will either look up every single conversation or rage quit if things become irreversible in story or combat builds.
It makes sense though. Why do people skip cutscenes or dialogue? Because most games don't have ramifications and permanence. It's the same in real life. When someone talks out of their ass or repeats things, you either don't take things seriously or tune them out.
Comments
I hope they can find a way to add more variables to obscure the outcome. Like others said, different choices are great but I can see this leading players to external websites more than ever. Perhaps by factoring in things like player reputation, class or even race, it might help them create more variety as to the reward given. Of course, all of that takes more time for both design and asset creation, but still I can dream.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Originally posted by Scagweed22
is it the graphics? the repetativenesses? i mean what is the point? you could be so much more productive in real life
Real life brings repetition and pointlessness too. The only thing real life offers is Great graphics. Its kinda expensive too and way to dependent on the cash shop. Totally pay to win as well. No thank you. Ill stick to my games.
Originally posted by Scagweed22
is it the graphics? the repetativenesses? i mean what is the point? you could be so much more productive in real life
Real life brings repetition and pointlessness too. The only thing real life offers is Great graphics. Its kinda expensive too and way to dependent on the cash shop. Totally pay to win as well. No thank you. Ill stick to my games.
I will use their example..
You hear a sound,well that is an automatic tell tale hand holding sign that you need to trigger or search for some quest or anything important to happen.We can assume important or the trigger wouldn't be there.
Perception itself is not a bad idea,but to pull it off with C+ code is really tough.I would prefer we the player to use OUR perception and NOT one built into the code.There are subtle things you can do to have we the player think twice,stop and wonder hmmmm something looks different here.Perhaps one Spruce tree surrounded by 20 Birch trees,,looks odd,maybe i better search that Spruce tree.
Personally i prefer to completely lose the idea of Quests unless they truly feel like some quest.
To me this is very much like a cheap idea adopted from GW2,a cheap quest is still a cheap quest,trying to disguise it or have it triggered does not improve it,you are still just questing and not even real questing,more still like doing fetch me or kill for me chores to attain xp.
On that same note,i cannot stand that games are giving you XP towards being a Warrior or Knight when you are doing NOTHING related to either role.Point being,i prefer to lose questing and badly implemented XP,triggers of any kind do not improve ideas.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
This is extending on the same philosophy that eq used, where you often found something related to a quest or various hints or lore, and then it was up to the player to pursue it - I call this open ended questing.
The dialog choice system described however, I am not sure how I feel about, it sound a bit .. locked, but I guess typing out stuff eq style is just a tad oldschool and I am certainly not for repeating eq at every little detail.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
I think the first step towards breaking the traditional Quest Marker will be the introduction of the 'Red Herring' triggers. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, as Sigmund Freud so aptly said. There could be absolutely no meaning to the One Spruce among Twenty Birches; it's okay for people to invest their time trying to find a quest that isn't there. But if there are 30 places where a spruce is mixed into some birches, it may make a wonderful place for a quest. But, let's not have a static quest location. Randomize the quest location.
You hear a sound may just be environmental, wind blowing leaves in the autumn. The sound of leaves isn't the sound of a dragon's final bellow as it dies. Not every thing the character perceives should lead to a quest. If there's a 1:1 relationship between a 'perception' and a 'quest', trust me, I'll just be thinking ! (v.2.0), only it's likely to come across as !%@##$!
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
A tell tale sign is fine. There has to be something to give a bit of direction,I hope those signs are done with in game audio and animations. I think of Lord Of The Rings and how mythril glows when in the presence of that particular adversary. Or wandering into a ruin, then the ground beneath you begins to disturb. My issue with questing in themeparks is it is always an errand and the end is always more important than the means.
Questing in my book should have the same goal as Genuine Curiosity.
1.Which is something different happens.
2.t is noticed by whoever is close by.
3.Different people perceive it in different ways.
4.Different people choose to act or not act in a certain way.
5.The outcome is realized differently on the actions they took or not.
Genuine Curiosity is hard to feel when something is commonplace. Questing is hard to feel when something is commonplace. Even your example of the spruce tree loses it's mystery if it used to often with the same outcome. I don't think any game can achieve persistent novelty with various outcomes. What they can achieve is how things are perceived by giving traits or personalities to how different characters perceive the same events happening, and that different perception can change the flow subtly.
The conversation path things reminds me of the Scourge Of Worlds choose your own adventure movie. That could be cool, but if option A offers better incentives than B,C, or D. Some players will either look up every single conversation or rage quit if things become irreversible in story or combat builds.
It makes sense though. Why do people skip cutscenes or dialogue? Because most games don't have ramifications and permanence. It's the same in real life. When someone talks out of their ass or repeats things, you either don't take things seriously or tune them out.