› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

Scope of World Persistence

cpromptcprompt Member Posts: 8
in Tabula Rasa
Richard Garriot has stated several times that a
persistent world ultimately diminishes interest in a MMOPRG.  Only
EVE seems to embrace a truly changing universe in the MMO sphere as it stands
to my knowledge.  My question is this, would anyone be interested in a TR
server that held the possibility that the players could lose and the game
restart (losing all characters on that server)?  It's a hardcore stand and
not for everyone and it sounds drastic, but there is a certain feeling I would
get when the Starcraft AI would wipe me out, something akin to highly motivated
revenge.  It kept me involved in that game a year more than I intended.


Comments

  • _Shadowmage_Shadowmage Member Posts: 1,459

    I dont know about having all my characters wiped - but I certainly agree we should be able to lose a planet, otherwise it wouldnt be realistic would it?

    I wonder how that would work - you would have to take into account timezones otherwise you might win a battle, go to sleep log on the next day to find the planet was lost.

    But maybe thats one way to move everyone onto the next planet - sometimes its because we won and move onto the next fight, sometimes its because we lose and evac out.

  • Ghost-HackGhost-Hack Member Posts: 51

    think about that example with starcraft...
    when the AI beats YOU.... it beats YOU...

    in an MMO... it could beat some kid in korea you've never met, and then the game whipes all of YOUR hardwork.

    ...You might get that sense of revenge... but it wont be towards the game or the AI.

  • BlinxerBlinxer Member CommonPosts: 120
    Well thats if you could lose a whole planet in a night. If it took several weeks of open war with the enemy, then one mistake could let them win the battle, Just not the war. This could be done with somthing like the Planetside base system except the outcomes for control of the bases would actually matter.

  • cpromptcprompt Member Posts: 8
    I was under the impression that a planet could be won or lost in a day or even a week.  The other course of action (if a world is being lost) is to have one small area that is safe and would represent a monumental amount of effort to break out of.  Regardless, if ONE server had a ruleset that said "If you play here, you might lose the game and your character to boot," would that be a turn-off or a turn-on?  As for me, I like a challenge, but no game should be designed for the smallest minority.  My question is how many people would like to give it a try?  A few? A lot?  None?

    A fundamental aspect of TR seems to be team PvE which means that everyone is playing a game to win.  It has to be one of the oldest threads around in developing MMORPG space, usually heavily-flamed threads at that.  Planetside, SWG, you name it.  Half wanted a world where nothing could effect them if they didn't want it to, the other side wanted something epic even if it meant the results were out of their control.   The TR interviews suggest that the TR team has a particular vission for "hard-core" gamers and world persistence, but I have no idea what it is.  Anyone have anything specific?


Sign In or Register to comment.