Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 25, 2017, 08:47:38 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
Donate! | Subscribe! | Shop: Amazon

***DONATION DRIVE 2 HAS BEGUN:
CLICK HERE TO BURN MONEY***
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: War December Newsletter + Looks like it's coming to a console 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 14 Go Down Print
Author Topic: War December Newsletter + Looks like it's coming to a console  (Read 136928 times)
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #175 on: January 01, 2007, 06:15:42 PM

If it's not a private forum for WAR discussion I don't see the point, it would just hurt the normal forums and reeks of elitism.  I could understand if Mythic wanted to keep WAR specific information out of the public domain for competitive reasons, that's been done here before for games under a beta nda. 
waylander
Terracotta Army
Posts: 526


Reply #176 on: January 01, 2007, 06:16:23 PM

Thanks for replying Mark. For the record, LotD is very pleased with what we've seen and heard about WAR.  Our largest guild chapter is WoW, with 70 members, and we've got another 50 who play something part time or who will be joining us for WAR. That said, we're paying close attention to any details about how the game isn't going to be WoW  1.5 because after 2 years we're sorta burned out on that.

I don't think you should force people into a PVP development track, but I do believe it should be an optional path for advancement at the equivalent of say level 10. Just give some co-op quests and an instance to tease people about what lies ahead if they PVP.

Anyways, happy new year!

Lords of the Dead
Gaming Press - Retired
waylander
Terracotta Army
Posts: 526


Reply #177 on: January 01, 2007, 06:17:40 PM

Thanks for replying Mark. For the record, LotD is very pleased with what we've seen and heard about WAR.  Our largest guild chapter is WoW, with 70 members, and we've got another 50 who play something part time or who will be joining us for WAR. That said, we're paying close attention to any details about how the game isn't going to be WoW  1.5 because after 2 years we're sorta burned out on that, and how the game supports full time gamers as well as the casuals (we're a mixture of both).

I don't think you should force people into a PVP development track, but I do believe it should be an optional path for advancement at the equivalent of say level 10. Just give some co-op quests and an instance to tease people about what lies ahead if they PVP.

Anyways, happy new year!


Lords of the Dead
Gaming Press - Retired
Sairon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 866


Reply #178 on: January 01, 2007, 06:40:59 PM

Quote
I don't think you should force people into a PVP development track, but I do believe it should be an optional path for advancement at the equivalent of say level 10. Just give some co-op quests and an instance to tease people about what lies ahead if they PVP.
I like the idea of having a totally separate path for PvP and PvE. If you do as in WoW then there's no point in doing both. I enjoy myself some PvE and PvP, but if I've advanced far in the PvP area I won't feel very tempted to slay foozle x which drops stuff that's comparatively crap.

I don't think it's that PvE players fear occasionally getting killed by another faction, it's just that they're not intrested in running around mostly dying in the traditional PvP experience.

I'd like to see a system where the people who aren't into PvP can play a role in the PvP areas of the game. For example, lets say that there's tasks to be done for your faction in the PvP area. Lets say the other side has managed to complete an objective that is to trash one of your factions bridges. Then the PvE people could engage relatively safely behind your lines in rebuilding the bridge. If the engine is flexible enough it would be possible to hack together a pretty nice bridge building game fairly easily, as in for example the RFK hamster quest in WoW. Building the bridge would then award advancement in the PvP path.

Another one could for example be manning catapults, trebuchets or whatever.

And just to throw something out there, I'd love to hear what your stance is on what they've done in WoW. They have sacrificed depth in order to keep it simple to get in to and easy to balance. In WoW the character building meta game is almost none existant. Finding out if a weapon is better than an other is practically as simple as comparing the DPS. You can pretty much keep procs, weapon speed and stuff like that out of the calculations since they have all been normalised. In order to make class balance easy races means jack shit in WoW. And when it comes to speccing, there's only a handful of specs which are remotely viable. There's a lot of more examples of this. I'm not saying you should need a manual the size of the bible, perhaps introduce the player to the more advanced topics gradually, as in WoW, when you start out you can't even access talents. Or perhaps a "recommend" button or something in which the game does a simple mathematical calculation on if weapon X is more beneficial to you than weapon Y at the current point.
Serek
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4


Reply #179 on: January 01, 2007, 07:15:48 PM

Mark,
First of all just want to say that my team and I are very excited about your game and can't wait to give it a try.  Secondly though if you can I would love to get a response to some concerns I have (not specifically about warhammer but the whole MMORPG scene lately). 

1) Instancing:
- PvP:  While I understand the usefulness of it in some situations, and look forward to trying your ideas on it, battle ground style instancing is by far the worst form of PvP I have ever had the misfortune of engaging in.  Especially in WoW, the way you enter them, and the whole point of them (that being there is no point), while from what I understand about your game so far you do not have many if any instanced "battlegrounds" however if you can, avoid them (and I don't mean ones that have a point, I am refering to capture the flag or capture the node for points type instanced pvp).  I am very impressed with the idea of capturing zones and moving closer to enemy cities, sounds amazing, but if you guys can find a way to place in a DAoC style castle siege system where guilds can claim castles (or even towers and forts) as they did in your previous game (maybe can use it as a base of some sort with supplies?) that would be simply amazing.  I guess what I am trying to say is that from your history and from what I have seen about Warhammer so far it is exactly what we have been looking for over the past 2 years, but do keep in mind the whole aspect of claiming things, it pushes PvP to a whole new personal level which makes it twice as fun (if someone captures a castle from your team... well thats not good, but if they capture your guild's castle... well then it gets exciting).

-PvE:  In reference to raid dungeons and other instances, these have become way over used.  For anyone who played EQ way back during the times of Chardok and NToV you had to race people for raid mobs, and more then anything else that is some serious fun competition.  When you remove competition for raid bosses, you remove the fight to improve as a guild so that you can compete.  You also remove the need to interact with other guilds which again is a key component to building a community (between guilds in particular).  Another thing that I personally miss is the opportunity to be a good player, when you have instanced dungeons you don't randomly run into people on the way to wherever you are going, and you never have the opportunity to help them out without leaving your own instance to do so.  EDIT: (I forgot to add something here) If there is a large enough diversity of raid areas, and raid bosses guilds will all be able to successfully compete.  The problem is these days diversity of raid bosses and areas has been replaced by one or two raid areas but instanced so everyone can do them to their heart's content (this also has negative effects on community). 

Something that I have not seen in awhile which needs to be revitalized is factions, especially raid factions.  When you are raiding making choices about where you raid based on factions can be a very key component.  It frees up raid areas because one guild will not be able to defeat bosses on opposing faction "A" if you need faction "A" to attain goals in order to gain bonuses from killing the bosses of faction "B".  It makes raiding systems dynamic, which makes them interesting, and in turn keeps people interested. 

On a last note "Flight Paths", please do not make travel overly easy.  If you build a massive world, keep it massive, if you can easily click to go to this zone and afk for 4 minutes while flying on the back of something and you are there it destroys the feeling of being in a large diverse world.  I'm not saying don't use them at all, but use them where they are needed, not as mass transit to every corner of your game.  In EQ planes of power destroyed the idea of the "world" due to the fact that you just clicked on book type things to go to a central hub of "go where ever you want" and in WoW you can fly from one tip of the continent to the other and everywhere in between while you go fetch a snack.  You might consider giving a class a transport ability for quick travel (good way to make money for those classes, if someone needs to be somewhere fast).  Otherwise quite literally by working to make travel easy and quick you are working to minimalize (yes I know its not a word) all the work you have done creating a vast and interesting landscape.

Please consider what I said, and I look forward to playing the game!

P.S. release more chaos info!
« Last Edit: January 02, 2007, 01:12:27 AM by Serek »

Serek V`Sek, Co-Leader: Darkness Descending
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2368


Reply #180 on: January 01, 2007, 07:20:40 PM

I'd like to see some battlefield direction from something during a battle.  If the AI is too difficult to figure out, then do the rank/random thing (highest ranking PC is made raid leader, if multiple folks have the same rank, random it) to determine who can set waypoints.  Biggest frustration/turnoff I've had to deal with is folks new to MMO PvP not having the fainest idea what to do, and the fast pace of PvP making it a pretty steep curve to learn.  Having waypoints/text appear telling where to go/what to do would go along way toward relieving that pressure.

But people can be douchebags, so I'd actually prefer that the AI give battlefield-level directions to groups, and group leaders give squad-level directions.
Sairon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 866


Reply #181 on: January 01, 2007, 08:12:26 PM

text

I know that there's a lot of people who feels the same way, but there's most likely even more who feels the opposite. Competitive hard core players think it's fun to compete about who can tag the mob first, who out dmgs who, or whatever is relevant in order to get loot rights. However, it also means that 99% of your paying subscribers will never participate because they don't stand a chance. Instancing solves this when it comes to PvE.

When it comes to PvP areas I somewhat agree, I'd rather have a very large zone with a lot of diffrent key points in which the players compete against each other. Players want to affect the world, leave a mark on it, that doesn't really play that well with instancing. Also, you can have a much more dynamic battlefield with a lot more strategic and tactical complexity.

When it comes to traveling, well, it's cool with a large massive world but without a way to travell it fairly swiftly you easily get bored. I'd rather sacrifice some of the massiveness of the world for some convenience in this case. I think AO did this very well. They had a 2 way portal system called whoompas which you used to travel the world. These were only placed around large cities mostly, so in order to get to the actual point you wanted to reach there was also some manual travel involved. They also had a level locked flying mount which you could by later on when you started to get bored of the running. The flying mounts were very swift compared to running, and it truly felt like a huge achievement once you finally got one. This way you got a feel of how large the world actually was early on, and just when you were about to get bored of running by foot you got yourself a flying mount.
Cheddar
I like pink
Posts: 4955

Noob Sauce


Reply #182 on: January 01, 2007, 08:17:18 PM

... but there's most likely even less idiots who feels the opposite. Fucking non functioning social retards think it's fun to compete about who can tag the mob first, who out dmgs who, or whatever is relevant in order to get loot rights. However, it also means that 99% of your paying subscribers will never participate due to the complete asstardery of lowering social standards because they don't stand a chance. Instancing solves this, but can ruin immersion if not done well when it comes to PvE.

...

When it comes to traveling, well, it's cool with a large massive world but without a way to travell it fairly swiftly you easily get bored. I'd rather sacrifice some of the massiveness of the world for some convenience in this case. ...

No Nerf, but I put a link to this very thread and I said that you all can guarantee for my purity. I even mentioned your case, and see if they can take a look at your lawn from a Michigan perspective.
bhodi
Moderator
Posts: 6817

No lie.


Reply #183 on: January 01, 2007, 08:24:20 PM

On a last note "Flight Paths", please do not make travel overly easy.  If you build a massive world, keep it massive, if you can easily click to go to this zone and afk for 4 minutes while flying on the back of something and you are there it destroys the feeling of being in a large diverse world.  I'm not saying don't use them at all, but use them where they are needed, not as mass transit to every corner of your game.  In EQ planes of power destroyed the idea of the "world" due to the fact that you just clicked on book type things to go to a central hub of "go where ever you want" and in WoW you can fly from one tip of the continent to the other and everywhere in between while you go fetch a snack.  You might consider giving a class a transport ability for quick travel (good way to make money for those classes, if someone needs to be somewhere fast).  Otherwise quite literally by working to make travel easy and quick you are working to minimalize (yes I know its not a word) all the work you have done creating a vast and interesting landscape.
I completely disagree. Forcing the player to experience a vastness of a world by refusing to put in conveniences is a road to disaster. If I can't log on and get to the fun in 10 minutes, I won't play the game. Spending time twiddling your thumbs while taking a taxi, or even worse, being forced to interact for extended periods of time without having fun - like, for instance, simply traveling by foot to another town, traveling to get to the fun - will only foster animosity. The first time you enter an area is amazing, the fourth or fifth time it becomes tedious. Tedious gameplay = lost subscriptions. Forcing the player to travel 'overland' once is fine, because that is new content. Forcing him to experience the same 'gameplay' to get to where he wants to go over and over again isn't. That is boring rehash and serves no purpose other than to piss your players off.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2007, 08:28:20 PM by bhodi »
HRose
I'm Special
Posts: 1205

VIKLAS!


WWW
Reply #184 on: January 01, 2007, 08:35:47 PM

I doubt Warhammer works as a massive world with many zones in the same way of WoW (and for PvP it's actually a good thing, as you need action to converge).

From their early plans you have one zone for each tier (that should group like ten levels together), with the possibility to travel to the other two zones corresponding to the two remaining battlefronts.

They still haven't revealed how the zones are connected together or how you travel from dwarf/greenskins zone to, say, human/chaos. But I doubt it will take a lot of time even by foot. At the end there are three zones you can pick and you are supposed to just stay in one if you decide so.

About travel itself they announced catapults for orcs. It sounds like a rather quick travel system, and if orcs have something like that you can be sure the other races will have something similar.

-HRose / Abalieno
cesspit.net
MarkJacobs
Developers
Posts: 109

Mythic Entertainment


Reply #185 on: January 01, 2007, 09:01:53 PM

Folks,

   Okay, some quick replies:

   As to the forum not being for WAR discussions, I said I didn't want it to be for WAR discussions.  Of course WAR will come up but I'd rather have the participants talking about theory/desire first and then talking about games after.  I want to hear their ideas about what works, doesn't work, could work without relying on WAR/DAoC/WoW/etc.

    In terms of what works/doesn't in WoW, as anyone who has seen my post or read my interviews, I don't bash other developers/publishers (one exception to date, EQBay).  Call it professional courtesy, politeness, whatever, I just don't like to do that in public or in forums. I've always hated when developers trash each others' games in order to get press, make friends, etc. so I won't bash WoW. What I've said about WoW to date is that it is the most successful MMORPG of all time and they got a bunch of things just right for their market.  That being said, they have made some choices I wouldn't have made and there is plenty of room for improvement in the genre.   

    In terms of instancing, tough balancing act.  100% instancing is really, really bad and I think that 100% open world can also be, unless implemented flawlessly, bad as well these days.  As we've said to date, we want to have a healthy mix of options for the players.

   In terms of travel times, I hate long travel times but also don't want instant travel around the world.  I've found that long travel time has, many times, discouraged me from doing certain things in the game that I wanted to do at that time.  I also think that it works against the time-challenged player and it is something I want to do better.  Finally, I also agree that it does make a world feel larger for the newbie but that it makes the game more annoying over time.

Mark
« Last Edit: January 01, 2007, 09:19:29 PM by MarkJacobs »
Cheddar
I like pink
Posts: 4955

Noob Sauce


Reply #186 on: January 01, 2007, 10:20:03 PM

Hey, Hrose. It hasn't been said in a while?

WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU?
26
Italy
Time waster
Awake from 8PM till 12AM


I never did understand the Viklas thing. 



No Nerf, but I put a link to this very thread and I said that you all can guarantee for my purity. I even mentioned your case, and see if they can take a look at your lawn from a Michigan perspective.
Strazos
Greetings from the Slave Coast
Posts: 15288

Trading Cotton for Chalupas in 2014!


Reply #187 on: January 01, 2007, 10:30:19 PM

http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail43.html

Point being that Hrose can be tough to understand.

Fear the Backstab!
"Plato said the virtuous man is at all times ready for a grammar snake attack." - we are lesion
"Hell is other people." -Sartre
tazelbain
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6603

tazelbain


Reply #188 on: January 01, 2007, 10:42:37 PM


So sure, there are lots of really good reasons not to build for RvR, and to go GvG instead.

But if you aren't aiming to focus on something different, ie. proper epic feeling battles that are also fun and interesting to play, I don't know why anyone would pay the cost of entry that RvR development carries with it.

I don't think it's an either/or situation.  If GvG doesn't matter in RvR, why should a guild bother to put effort to build  a solid team together to help the realm army?  If anybody will do, why put in the effort, better to go to the common area spam the chat channels to get warm bodies. Anybody who attack the called target will do, maybe a healer or two, but who gives a shit as long as they show up.

I don't have an issue with 60v60 or 200v150.  Although if the game server or client can't handle it, you probably shouldn't encourage it.  But why should the 60 always be together to count as an organized. I want to see landscapes with 30troops are scaling the fortess, 20 are laundching artilary at enemy reinforcements, and the last 10 are securing a rez point. The enemy could send all 60 of their troops 60 against each of those points one at a time but that would leave the other points valuable be recapture.  Now eveyone's choices aren't so simple and all the unaligned groups are out there causing even more trouble.  If you don't want the zerg to be mindless you are going to have to give them meaningful and often conflicting option to choice from.

"Me am play gods"
Serek
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4


Reply #189 on: January 02, 2007, 12:43:18 AM


I know that there's a lot of people who feels the same way, but there's most likely even more who feels the opposite. Competitive hard core players think it's fun to compete about who can tag the mob first, who out dmgs who, or whatever is relevant in order to get loot rights. However, it also means that 99% of your paying subscribers will never participate because they don't stand a chance. Instancing solves this when it comes to PvE.


I disagree, you can (with some hard work) easily balance instancing and competition style raiding using a tier system that will allow for all kinds of players to experience different levels of game play.  The whole issue is doing it so that there is enough diversity of raids available that it does not turn into a "one guild kills everything" and using a mix of instanced and non-instanced raids skillfully you can accommodate both populations.  So far I have not seen many examples where this was done well.



I completely disagree. Forcing the player to experience a vastness of a world by refusing to put in conveniences is a road to disaster. If I can't log on and get to the fun in 10 minutes, I won't play the game. Spending time twiddling your thumbs while taking a taxi, or even worse, being forced to interact for extended periods of time without having fun - like, for instance, simply traveling by foot to another town, traveling to get to the fun - will only foster animosity. The first time you enter an area is amazing, the fourth or fifth time it becomes tedious. Tedious gameplay = lost subscriptions. Forcing the player to travel 'overland' once is fine, because that is new content. Forcing him to experience the same 'gameplay' to get to where he wants to go over and over again isn't. That is boring rehash and serves no purpose other than to piss your players off.

I'm not sure you fully understood what I was saying.  I am in no way for refusing to put in conveniences, however I am against extreme over use of them which has been the way many games eventually turn to.  Every time there is a city, a castle, a fort or at least some sort of building with more then just the NPC that deals with flight paths, I am absolutely cool with a flight path.  What I do not enjoy is having a flight path at every tiny little trade outpost I ever visit a band of adventurers who set up camp in some far off forest is not going to be dragging along a flock of flying creatures and a beacon just in case someone gets home sick or one of their friends wants to come visit.  Also for those interested in absolutely instant gratification I hear theres quite a few console games up on the market these days.

Thanks for the response to some of my issues in the previous post Mark, and I defiantely agree it is childish for people to bash other game companies (with some exceptions) for their mistakes, however I was not looking for you to do so, was just using other games as a point of reference to highlight some of my concerns.

Thanks again
« Last Edit: January 02, 2007, 01:13:06 AM by Serek »

Serek V`Sek, Co-Leader: Darkness Descending
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #190 on: January 02, 2007, 12:48:05 AM

Thanks again
Serek V'Sek, Co-Leader: Darkness Descending

You said that already.

What's next? Graphical sigs?
WindupAtheist
Army of One
Posts: 7028

Badicalthon


Reply #191 on: January 02, 2007, 12:50:06 AM

Thanks again
Serek V'Sek, Co-Leader: Darkness Descending

WoW won.  The sort of EQ1 shit you're talking about is over.  Instant gratification for the win.

WindupAtheist, Co-leader:  Nutsacks Neverending

"You're just a dick who quotes himself in his sig."  --  Schild
"Yeah, it's pretty awesome."  --  Me
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #192 on: January 02, 2007, 12:58:51 AM

Finally for once, WUA and I are of the same mind.
WindupAtheist
Army of One
Posts: 7028

Badicalthon


Reply #193 on: January 02, 2007, 01:11:39 AM

I also like Robert E. Howard and Deep Space Nine.

WindupAtheist, Grand Marshall:  Poopsocks Patronizing

"You're just a dick who quotes himself in his sig."  --  Schild
"Yeah, it's pretty awesome."  --  Me
Serek
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4


Reply #194 on: January 02, 2007, 01:14:10 AM

Better turf-afro boy?
« Last Edit: January 02, 2007, 01:16:58 AM by Serek »

Serek V`Sek, Co-Leader: Darkness Descending
Zane0
Terracotta Army
Posts: 300


Reply #195 on: January 02, 2007, 01:50:41 AM

I have nothing constructive to add.  I'd just like to say that this has been a thoroughly enjoyable read.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 55315


WWW
Reply #196 on: January 02, 2007, 01:58:11 AM

Better turf-afro boy?

You don't get to be a dick.

Best Regards,
Schild
editor, f13.net
WindupAtheist
Army of One
Posts: 7028

Badicalthon


Reply #197 on: January 02, 2007, 02:23:57 AM

Please tell me that was a "You're banned!" send-off.  I know you don't usually do that, but look at his sig.  We don't need his sort here.  Otherwise, next thing you know this'll be a sewer like Stratics, with giant graphical sigs of pirated Boris Vallejo art crudely stamped with the name of some asshat's game character.

"You're just a dick who quotes himself in his sig."  --  Schild
"Yeah, it's pretty awesome."  --  Me
Serek
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4


Reply #198 on: January 02, 2007, 02:29:12 AM


You don't get to be a dick.

Best Regards,
Schild
editor, f13.net

Humn... didn't realize my joke about his space balls avatar was being a dick, but I've been wrong before...
« Last Edit: January 02, 2007, 03:08:23 AM by Serek »

Serek V`Sek, Co-Leader: Darkness Descending
WindupAtheist
Army of One
Posts: 7028

Badicalthon


Reply #199 on: January 02, 2007, 02:30:36 AM

That's it, I'm making a graphical sig...

« Last Edit: January 02, 2007, 02:46:48 AM by WindupAtheist »

"You're just a dick who quotes himself in his sig."  --  Schild
"Yeah, it's pretty awesome."  --  Me
Kinan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5


Reply #200 on: January 02, 2007, 02:54:25 AM

As for travelling, I think EQ2 did it best (and first?). You should travel to a location slowly first and than you have an option for a quick transportation method. If I remember right, even then its not free and costs some money, so sometimes you choose a slow route just to save some coin. While flying in wow functions similar, its still too slow for my liking to be called "quick transportation method". .)

Current version of DAoC has implemented something similar as well, but old-school travelling was pain in the a--e, old epics were like 5 hours of horse ride and 1 hour of action, geesh.
angry.bob
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5442

We're no strangers to love. You know the rules and so do I.


Reply #201 on: January 02, 2007, 02:57:04 AM

Keep it on topic people. Poop all over the Raph thread if you feel the need.

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.
Tegatana
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5


Reply #202 on: January 02, 2007, 03:17:07 AM

If it's not a private forum for WAR discussion I don't see the point, it would just hurt the normal forums and reeks of elitism.  I could understand if Mythic wanted to keep WAR specific information out of the public domain for competitive reasons, that's been done here before for games under a beta nda. 


Guess the lagal point is the most important point here. If i understand him correctly (stupid german here), he options for a plattform to discuss MMORPG-design in general.

From a player and reader point of view you take MMORPGs as what they are for you, a game and a hobby, but for "insert company or employee here" they are multi-million dollar business!
So if YOU have this devine intervention and come up with a revolutionary idea of gameplay or feature, you should not be able to sue Mythic in case they announce that feature or a new game using your idea.
"Intellecutal property" (is the term in englich right?) is a huge issue in any business and any company has to hold a department full of lawyers specialised in that branch :-(. It is VERY important to secure the intellectual property for anyone, but the lawsuits in result are often countless and sometimes very wierd.
Write a book and let it be successfull... 10 weeks later you have hundrets of people in court claiming you stole "their" idea and they all want a share of the money.
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #203 on: January 02, 2007, 03:53:15 AM

Guess the lagal point is the most important point here. If i understand him correctly (stupid german here), he options for a plattform to discuss MMORPG-design in general.

Kinda like a mmog discussion forum then?


From a player and reader point of view you take MMORPGs as what they are for you, a game and a hobby, but for "insert company or employee here" they are multi-million dollar business!
So if YOU have this devine intervention and come up with a revolutionary idea of gameplay or feature, you should not be able to sue Mythic in case they announce that feature or a new game using your idea.
"Intellecutal property" (is the term in englich right?) is a huge issue in any business and any company has to hold a department full of lawyers specialised in that branch :-(. It is VERY important to secure the intellectual property for anyone, but the lawsuits in result are often countless and sometimes very wierd.
Write a book and let it be successfull... 10 weeks later you have hundrets of people in court claiming you stole "their" idea and they all want a share of the money.

Meanwhile back on planet earth, Blizzard implemented DAoC's battlegrounds, funny I have not seen anyone taking them to court.  I think submarines are the next big thing for mmorpg's, so all you game designers out there, stay away from my submarine idea or lawyer up! 

Complete bollocks, the most recent revolutionary idea was when Blizzard made a game where it didn't suck to level up, now the world is full of game devs going, "oh why didn't I think of that?".  The next revolutionary idea will be when someone releases a game that's enjoyable during the leveling/skill gain process and continues to be fun even after that section of the game ends.

I loved your "they are multi-million dollar business!" comment though  :-D
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10316


Reply #204 on: January 02, 2007, 04:32:01 AM

Please tell me that was a "You're banned!" send-off.  I know you don't usually do that, but look at his sig.  We don't need his sort here.  Otherwise, next thing you know this'll be a sewer like Stratics, with giant graphical sigs of pirated Boris Vallejo art crudely stamped with the name of some asshat's game character.

pfft.

You're just worried this thread may challenge your UO and SW threads for 100 page uber-thread dominance.

Hrose was going to pull a chart out of his ass any moment.

Quote from: Mark Jacobs
  In terms of travel times, I hate long travel times but also don't want instant travel around the world.

I think people underestimate how much they can make a world feel big simply by managing content. If I explore every corner of newbie-zone in my first ten levels, but never have a good reason to leave it, the level 10-20 zone is still an undiscovered country when I first get taken there. CoV feels much bigger than CoH (at least it did to me) for exactly this reason.

Quote from: Tazelbain
I don't think it's an either/or situation.  If GvG doesn't matter in RvR, why should a guild bother to put effort to build  a solid team together to help the realm army?  If anybody will do, why put in the effort, better to go to the common area spam the chat channels to get warm bodies. Anybody who attack the called target will do, maybe a healer or two, but who gives a shit as long as they show up.

Fair enough - and I don't mind GvG mattering, so long as it is mattering in the RvR framework. Dwarf Group 1 has to care whether Dwarf Group 2 is winning. Else it isn't RvR any more.

That said, it's important to also remember that if you were to ask long term casual rvr players in daoc or eve, they'll consistently tell you that they find 100v100 more fun than 8v8. The trick is in designing a game to make that sustained, fun, 100v100 battle happen, because it's obviously much harder to do than simply throwing 16 guys in a room and telling them to go at it.

As for why a guild still puts a solid group together for a realm event, people still like to be contributing the most within a real battle, and still want to have their side win. In DAoC the motivation to build a good group was plenty strong even in a 100 v 100 relic battle, if you didn't have enough healers you'd die and spend the rest of the time lying down watching the battle, if you didn't have enough offensive characters you weren't getting any RP, you weren't having any effect on the outcome, and you spend the whole time standing up watching the battle.

Quote from: Typhon
I'd like to see some battlefield direction from something during a battle.  If the AI is too difficult to figure out, then do the rank/random thing (highest ranking PC is made raid leader, if multiple folks have the same rank, random it) to determine who can set waypoints.  Biggest frustration/turnoff I've had to deal with is folks new to MMO PvP not having the fainest idea what to do, and the fast pace of PvP making it a pretty steep curve to learn.  Having waypoints/text appear telling where to go/what to do would go along way toward relieving that pressure.

But people can be douchebags, so I'd actually prefer that the AI give battlefield-level directions to groups, and group leaders give squad-level directions.

Surely you just have group leaders able to join their group to a 'raiding party', and the raiding party has a nominated leader able to do things like setting planetside style waypoints, and able to doodle on the in game map like Guild Wars (there is an ingame map, right?), or to send messages to the center of the rading group members screens - like squad leaders in SWG. If you were feeling really brave you could implement a system where raiding party leaders have access to battlefield condition modifying spells or abilities depending on the makeup of their raiding party.

Chatgroups (with chatgroup leaders able to define speaking rights) go a long way in this regard even without waypoints and map doodling.

AI would suck at battle direction, and anything which autoselects a leader would result in annoyance and sillyness when some solo sniper who plays for his own RPs randomly becomes the highest ranked in the zone. You just have the group leaders select their own raid leader the same way as groups select a group leader.


« Last Edit: January 02, 2007, 05:08:47 AM by eldaec »

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Yoru
Moderator
Posts: 4611

the y master, king of bourbon


WWW
Reply #205 on: January 02, 2007, 04:37:58 AM

Guess the lagal point is the most important point here. If i understand him correctly (stupid german here), he options for a plattform to discuss MMORPG-design in general.

Kinda like a mmog discussion forum then?

The key difference being that those posting to the "hidden forum" would have the implicit declaration that they're forfeiting their IP rights to whatever ideas they present; an assumption not directly stated for our current Game Design forum. Which is what I believe Tegatana was attempting to get at before tripping on the language barrier.
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #206 on: January 02, 2007, 04:46:32 AM

Yeah but even accepting there is a need, which I don't, it certainly doesn't have to be hidden.  You have to register to post so it could be a click through or a membership group you have to apply to join with terms you have to agree to about giving up your rights.
Sairon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 866


Reply #207 on: January 02, 2007, 05:20:54 AM

Perhaps a little elitist, but I actually like the idea of a closed private forum. Quality will suffer if it's public, especially since these forums are pretty lose on moderation, which isn't something that's bad in its own right though.
Tegatana
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5


Reply #208 on: January 02, 2007, 06:18:31 AM

Meanwhile back on planet earth, Blizzard implemented DAoC's battlegrounds, funny I have not seen anyone taking them to court.  I think submarines are the next big thing for mmorpg's, so all you game designers out there, stay away from my submarine idea or lawyer up! 

Complete bollocks, the most recent revolutionary idea was when Blizzard made a game where it didn't suck to level up, now the world is full of game devs going, "oh why didn't I think of that?".  The next revolutionary idea will be when someone releases a game that's enjoyable during the leveling/skill gain process and continues to be fun even after that section of the game ends.

I loved your "they are multi-million dollar business!" comment though  :-D

Well you got a valid point here, you didn t hear about it, so it doesn t happen :-D

I have seen it happen while i was working in the gaming industrie, but only the REAL big things come up in the press (like someone claiming the idea of Harry Potter is stolen or someone suing Brown over Illuminati). And wasn t the USA the country where you can win files about burning your lips on hot coffee in an MC Donalds Store? :-D
Sairon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 866


Reply #209 on: January 02, 2007, 06:21:45 AM

It's one thing stealing an ip, and another stealing mechanics. If there has been a lawsuit relating to theft of mechanics in a MMO I bet it would've made its way here.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 14 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: War December Newsletter + Looks like it's coming to a console  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC