Mythic PKs Microsoft. Gets Phat Lewt.

[Kyper]

According to this article at HomeLan Fed, Mythic's lawsuit against Microsoft is over.  Is this the real reason Mythica was cancelled?  I can understand dropping the name, but to dump an entire game because of a name seems extreme.

Mythic Entertainment's PR folks sent over a press release announcing that the developer has settled its lawsuit with Microsoft over the latter company's naming of its now cancelled MMORPG Mythica. Here is a snip:


As part of the settlement Microsoft has agreed not to use the term “Mythica” or a number of derivations of that term in connection with future on line computer games, and to drop its U.S. applications to register Mythica as a trademark. In addition, Microsoft will assign to Mythic, for undisclosed consideration, certain international trademark applications and registrations, common law rights and associated goodwill pertaining to the name Mythica, as well as domain names that were using the name in commerce. As part of the settlement, neither party admitted any fault or liability.

[eldaec]

No.

You are suffering from faulty cause and effect.

The lawsuit was settled because the game was cancelled.

[Venkman]

Plenty of reasons for Mythic to want to pick up the name. Most have been mentioned already, but I personally agree with them wanting to protect their name. It could also have been, as Mi_Tes put it over at Corpnews:

It was more like Mark Jacobs saying and slapping his head, "Oh shit, why did I never think of that name."

Microsoft dumping Mythica is a separate issue but I do think it was related. The game looked really fun when they showed it at E3 (though they weren't letting folks play it), and I was excited for it. But with their announcement that they'd work with Sigil Games (Brad McQuaid et al), I felt the writing was on the wall for Mythica. Why spend time struggling to learn an entire genre when you can just buy your way into it? The lawsuit was probably just the straw upon the back of the proverbial camel. It's not like Microsoft was really legally worried about a company they could buy and sell 100 times, over breakfast.

Mythica had promise. They were using instancing in a way Tabula Rasa is promising along with the fantastic Havoc physics engine to connote a sense of heroic power even CoH only barely touches upon.

But alas, another loss.

[Pug]

I think that Mythica was cancelled because someone at Microsoft realized how fucking stupid instancing is in a massively multi-player game. It's only a matter of time before everyone else figures it out. Good call Bill.

[Dren]

I think that Mythica was cancelled because someone at Microsoft realized how fucking stupid instancing is in a massively multi-player game. It's only a matter of time before everyone else figures it out. Good call Bill.

Yep, so stupid it works.  That how logic goes in the MMOG universe.

[Venkman]

I think that Mythica was cancelled because someone at Microsoft realized how fucking stupid instancing is in a massively multi-player game. It's only a matter of time before everyone else figures it out. Good call Bill.

If NC Soft, Cryptic Studios, NetDevil, Dimension Games, Sigil Games and SOE all fold, then you'll be right.

For the foreseeable future though, you are in the vocal minority. Instancing works because people don't like other people getting in the way unless they're friends. Right or wrong, it's the way it is.

[HaemishM]

I think that Mythica was cancelled because someone at Microsoft realized how fucking stupid instancing is in a massively multi-player game. It's only a matter of time before everyone else figures it out. Good call Bill.

Uhhh, yeah. Sure. Talk to me in about 10 years when no MMOG is without some form of instancing.

The reasons to use instancing are so much more convincing than the reasons NOT to use instancing. If you want to see how not-instancing is going to fuck up a game, go play Wish when it comes out.

[Krakrok]

Instancing: Taking the slot machine to a higher level.

[HaemishM]

Instancing: Taking the slot machine to a higher level.

Everquest... putting a purty skin on Progressquest.

I'll take instancing, kthxverymuch.

[Pug]

I didn't say that instancing sucked, I said that it's fucking stupid to put it into a MMOG. I love the "instancing" of games like Quake, Counter-Strike and Diablo... but they aren't MMOGs. Changing how players interact changes the game. Period.

How will publishers justify charging $15 a month to play a game that is no more massively multi-player than Internet Hearts? I thought the old bleeding heart line of bullshit was bandwidth and expensive servers. What kind of server do you need to run a game of "instanced" Diablo? And now Guild Wars is coming out with no monthly fee (they do not claim to be a MMOG).

Instancing may produce better gameplay but only by proving that MMOGs are, were and have always been a bad idea. If you're the kind of person who gets excited about instancing then you probably never really liked MMOGs. You don't want a better MMOG, you want a better Diablo.

I'm not saying that liking instancing is bad, just that instancing is the anti-MMOG and so instancing in a MMOG is fucking stupid.

[Morfiend]

Uhhh, yeah. Sure. Talk to me next year when no MMOG is without some form of instancing.

I went ahead and fixed that for ya.

[HaemishM]

I love the potential to interact with thousands, I just don't want to interact with thousands EVERY SINGLE GODDAMN MINUTE I'm playing the game. Like when I zone into the ULTRA-DANGEROUS DUNGEON and there are fifty people in a line in front of me, waiting to kill the dragon. If istancing can cure that, it can make MMOG's better.

I like the concept of MMOG's, the implementation has been piss poor. The idea that throwing more and more people together into the same environment makes the environment better is flawed. I think MMOG's with LESS population is a good thing.

[Sky]

I like the concept of MMOG's, the implementation has been piss poor. The idea that throwing more and more people together into the same environment makes the environment better is flawed. I think MMOG's with LESS population is a good thing.

Slyfeind's sig on Grimwell.com:

"It's like the 'enhancement stoner' from Half Baked. "Have you ever played boring repetetive combat? ....Have you ever played boring repetetive combat with friends???" - Sky, on the MMOG genre

[daveNYC]

Slyfeind's sig on Grimwell.com:

"It's like the 'enhancement stoner' from Half Baked. "Have you ever played boring repetetive combat? ....Have you ever played boring repetetive combat with friends???" - Sky, on the MMOG genre

That sounds like the people who argue that every game should have an open-PvP server.

[Alluvian]

How will publishers justify charging $15 a month to play a game that is no more massively multi-player than Internet Hearts? I thought the old bleeding heart line of bullshit was bandwidth and expensive servers. What kind of server do you need to run a game of "instanced" Diablo? And now Guild Wars is coming out with no monthly fee (they do not claim to be a MMOG).

The fee is justified if you are playing on their servers that have to support hundreds of thousands of players.  Diablo didn't have that.  They had a modified IRC server and then you went off into peer to peer battles with no server.  Welcome cheating.  And not really much of anything you can do to stop it.  EVERYTHING is in the hands of the wannabe cheater.  You can't really fix it.  You can try, but it won't be very successful.  Punkbuster fucks up connections and people can STILL cheat through it.

People can also find ways of cheating in mmog games.  The difference in my mind is that an MMOG company that runs the server CAN stop cheating.  They may or may not choose to, but a company just giving out software that runs peer to peer really has no way to stop cheating.  If the mmog company does nothing at all to stop cheating then I don't really see much difference to the end user other than a generally more stable platform for gaming.  I had HORDES of disconnects from D2 when I used to try and play it.  It probably got better eventually.

The REAL answer is that they do not have to justify the cost at all.  Just charge what people will pay.

I personally like the instancing in CoH, which is VERY heavily instanced.  In the end all MMOG games are instanced if you want to be practical.  You can't have thousands interacting at once.  Once you move those thousands to the same area at once the server will crash or it won't display any more than the nearest X players (which might as well be instancing).  I would rather the game run stable and instance when necessary than not instance and just blow up in flames when too many players gather.

[Venkman]

I'm not saying that liking instancing is bad, just that instancing is the anti-MMOG and so instancing in a MMOG is fucking stupid.

Instancing is not at all MMOG. The genre is still being classified. Ask 10 people what an MMOG is and you'll get five answers (the other five are medding).

People have wanted instancing since even well before the first time they went to visit the Ancient Lich and found someone there ahead of them. And please don't bother with any niave conservative bullshit about how players should be patient or seek another option.

The future will be defined by how much instantiated content appears in these games. It's about playgrounds, penned in areas where uber jobless can spend 15 hours a day on their thing while folks-with-lives go off somewhere else.

It's just another mini-game with the larger whole. The next two years will be about games finding that balance between "this is a cool way to spend some time with my insular core group" versus "there's no reason to pay for this game since everyone solos it."

Neither of those is at all unlike what goes on now. Instancing just formalizes it.

[Alluvian]

And please don't bother with any niave conservative bullshit about how players should be patient or seek another option

Since when is hating or liking camping a political issue?  I don't think I have ever seen a politician with Camping or No Camping on their political platforms.

Although Lieberman would probably say no camping because that would mean killing something and video game violence is bad, mmmmkay?  Although camping a lumber respawn in ATITD could muddy up things abit.  Then again that is destroying natural habitats and also bad...

[Venkman]

I don't think I have ever seen a politician with Camping or No Camping on their political platforms.

Of course you haven't. It's unpatriotic!

[Alluvian]

I don't think I have ever seen a politician with Camping or No Camping on their political platforms.

Of course you haven't. It's unpatriotic!

Pika?

[Pug]

Instanced massively multi-player game is an oxymoron. Let's stop kidding ourselves and just drop the massive from the description. These new games are merely instanced multi-player games. For better or worse, playing an IMP is not the same as playing MMOG.

The difference between instancing and zoning is not just semantics. You never have more than one copy of a zone per world with zoning but you often have multiple copies of a single area with instancing.

My vision of the perfect MMOG is a world where players battle for control of areas. There is actually interaction between massive amounts of players in the impact that player organizations have on the world as they gain and lose control of game areas. Having multiple copies of separate worlds is fine but having multiple copies of each area in a single loosely connected world is not.

PvE MMOGs were bound to die anyway. It's good knowing that PvE IMPs will put them out of their misery. The sooner the better. Fucking stupid creations.

PvP MMOGs have just began to develope and will be the future of the MMOG genre.

[Rasix]

Ok. Thanks for sharing.

[Krakrok]

Let me correct that, instancing is just adding more slot machines to the casino so you don't have to stand in line before you can use the slot machine.

The analogy between MMOG's and casinos works rather well I think. There is the casino with it's staff that watchs to make sure no one is cheating (GM's). If you aren't spending money they usually want you to leave the casino (monthly fee). Where MMOG's usually fall down is that they only have one game and that is the slot machine. Instancing usually just adds more slot machines not more game variety like adding blackjack, poker, roulette, craps, pachinko, etc.


UO started as a sandbox (where anyone could steal your shovel?)

EQ started as a bunch of single use slot machines.

CoH has a bunch of cloned pachinko machines anyone can use any time.

Savage has cloned pachinko machines with a single seat blackjack table for every 32 slot machines.

Guild Wars has cloned slot machines, cloned games of team blackjack, and cloned 8 seat poker tables.

Diablo has cloned craps on the street corner in a bad part of town and when the wrong character comes by you get mugged.

SWG has cloned slot machines and they want to add cloned pachinko with their Jump to Lightspeed expansion.

---

YMMV

[HaemishM]

PvP MMOGs have just began to develope and will be the future of the MMOG genre...

Fifteen years from now. Maybe. If someone can come up with a scheme that actually is able to inject hardcore player accountability into the game.

PVP as a playstyle is NOT EVER going to be massively marketable, because the vast majority of people cannot resist being a cockmuncher to someone else. Instancing helps cut down the grief factor, as well as insulating the PVP from people who don't want to go do that, or don't want to do it every day.

[Alluvian]

Pug, by your logic I should sue mmog games because I can't play with thousands of people around me because the game server will crash.  No current mmog that I know of is really that massive.  Maybe 150 or so people in line of sight before they start to vomit.

[anyuzer]

Instancing as an acceptable mechanic is being put through trial by fire in the next two years as nearly every MMOG is trying it out to some degree. Sigil Games Online is anti-instancing, the rest are running with it, but it hasn't really been used enough to prove whether it's beneficial to the over all subscription base and player retention of an MMOG or negative.

The only games we've really seen instancing in are, Anarchy Online, which was crippled as everybody knows from other idiotic problems. And now City of Heroes, which rules, but then, it's like playing a single player game. Does City of Heroes have the depth to stand the test of time? Who knows.

World of Warcraft uses it, apparently, but then, I'm level 20 and haven't run across it yet. Which is unfortunate to some degree because I want the B.Net community to burn en masse for the betterment of mankind.

Either way, instancing as a mechanic is a toss up. It hasn't been proven or disproven yet.

[Dark_MadMax]

I love the potential to interact with thousands, I just don't want to interact with thousands EVERY SINGLE GODDAMN MINUTE I'm playing the game. Like when I zone into the ULTRA-DANGEROUS DUNGEON and there are fifty people in a line in front of me, waiting to kill the dragon. If istancing can cure that, it can make MMOG's better.

I like the concept of MMOG's, the implementation has been piss poor. The idea that throwing more and more people together into the same environment makes the environment better is flawed. I think MMOG's with LESS population is a good thing.

 If I want  "MMOG's with LESS population" I' ll go play Guild Wars and no way in hell I will pay 15$ for subscr fee. -Exactly reason I dont pay for planetside-  very fun combat ,nice graphics, nice options but  with absolutely meaningless combat - no thanks,  I have already bf1942 and UT2004 for that with less lag and prettier graphics.

 If I want "rpg"ish feel I will play NWN. Again no thanks.

 I am not saying instancing is not fun - heck I will buy GW for sure. But I am firm that I will not pay any fee for game like that either - its nothing new ,  -it is the same multiplayer component which games had since Doom. Fun but its not what for I pay subscr fee in mmorpgs.

[WayAbvPar]

I want the B.Net community to burn en masse for the betterment of mankind.

I would settle for a mass sterilization, but your plan works too.

[Rasix]

Did you type that while watching porn? Fucking hell.  (directed at MadMax)

I think I'll have agree with anyuzer and Darniaq and others on this.  Instancing is an unproven mechanic for a genre that is pretty much still defining itself. If anything, City of Heroes will prove or disprove somewhat if instancing can sustain a large subscriber base (although the game itself might not be a good control, being that it's somewhat atypical so far for the genre).

Haemish touches upon instancing freeing you somewhat from the more undesirable crowds that tend to play these games, but it's also one of the few ways the developers are trying to bridge the gap between the catass "play 4 hours a day or else" and those that want to just hop for a quick 30 minute play session.  Until a company can provide a quick, fun, engrossing experience in an hour or less, instancing will ALWAYS have a home in this field.

[eldaec]

Anti-immersivness effect of instancing < anti-rpg factor of having a monster respawn in front of your eyes.

[eldaec]

Also

Effect of designing a co-operative multiplayer game based around xp generation and levelling, then putting huge xp generation penalties on helping each other outside of size limited groups = all value in multiple groups being in the same dungeon neutralised.

[heck]

Question about instancing:  is the loot of an instanced area randomly generated each time one enters, and then reset when one exits and re-enters?  

For instance the Borgle Caves in SWG: one enters and raids the "debris piles" for the skill tapes, then exits the Caves, then hits it again and again...at the end of the day one has a ber-jillion skill tapes.  

I ask because all I ever heard about when it came to SWG lewt (or lack thereof) was the precious "economy" that was always in danger of being tainted.

[cevik]

Question about instancing:  is the loot of an instanced area randomly generated each time one enters, and then reset when one exits and re-enters?  

Uhmm, it depends on the implimentation..

[Rasix]

I suppose it depends on the flavor of instancing you're talking about.

For example, in City of Heroes, all loot (per se) is randomly generated:

1. You locate and enter your mission.  
2. You fight mobs, get inspirations, exp, and enhancements.  
3. At any time you can exit the mission and switch to another mission, thus resetting the mission.  
4. Mission repopulates.  

Where this becomes exploitable is that certain boss mobs(arch villians) always drop good enhancements (ie Dr. Vahz) and killing that boss doesn't complete the mission. So, you could reset the mission and kill the boss again and get another piece of good randomly generated loot.

Most instancing deals with random loot because really, it's random content.  In Anarachy Online it's for a target piece of loot, but then again, it's not resettable and the loot within the mission is random.  

Does that help?

[Pug]

Thanks for sharing.

Pug, by your logic I should sue mmog games because I can't play with thousands of people around me because the game server will crash.  No current mmog that I know of is really that massive.  Maybe 150 or so people in line of sight before they start to vomit.

Zone = Content is shared in public areas with an entire servers' population

Instanced Area = Content is unique to the players playing in a private area

If knowing that makes you want to start yet another frivolous lawsuit then more power to you.

[Rasix]

Thanks for sharing.

OHHHHHH BURN RIGHT BACK AT ME OMG USING MY WORDS AGAINST ME>LDKJFSDLKFJ DDFKD CANNOT CONTINUE.....

Hey, I thought your post was too moronic and opinionated to warrant any sort of logical response.  Out of respect to Gordon I didn't use "PSYCHO".