Network Sites: FPSguru.com RTSguru.com UnboundGamer.com
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Games:567  Guilds:2,961
Members:1,440,600  Online:0
Guests:0  Posts:4,571,845

Show Blog

Censorship...

Posted by t0nyd Wednesday December 26 2007 at 7:24PM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

 

 I've come across a few articles about the use of censorship in gaming. Also I have recently seen several targeting Age Of Conan. I am in no way saying that AoC will be censored in the U.S.. I am worried that our entertainment will be policed(ruined) by whom ever.

 I am for ratings. I am against the policing of our entertainment. If you stick with the theme of AoC, you will have foul language, violent content, and nudity. Removing any of these three will break the setting that is Conan.

 There is no reason a game should be forced to be different than any movie out there. Slap a rating on the game. Sell the game as mature. Move on. Hopefully Funcom does not cave into pressure and remove aspects from the game. If they want to sell the game to children, by all means release a dumbed down version in a different box, clearly labeled " Childrens Version ".

 I will not buy a censored AoC...

MUD transition to graphical MMORPG's and whats been lost in the process...

Posted by t0nyd Sunday December 23 2007 at 2:22PM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

 

         I remember back in the day, when my daily dosage of roleplaying came in the form of text based muds. I remember dreaming of the potential of a graphics based version of my favorite mud. Now with mmorpgs being pretty common, id like to ponder the differences between graphical mmorpgs and text based and what both bring to the table.

          Small Community

  •  MUD

Most muds had small tight nit communities. In a community such as this, the players are usually the developers. Also the common players and the devs mingle together to form the community. Player ideas are heard and discussed.

With a few hundred players, its a lot easier to become known for your accomplishments. A player can actually become famous/infamous. Your actions feel like they can affect the world and the players with in. I have yet to see a mud that has multiple servers running, where you do not come into contact with every player on.

  • Graphical MMO

With the immense size of most graphical MMO's, it is very difficult to stand out. The players and devs do not mix. Most players feel as if their ideas or suggestions are ignored.

With a few million players, its nearly impossible to become famous/infamous. Most graphical MMO's do not even give options for players to be known. Your actions feel as if they do not affect the world or players with in it. Most Graphical MMO's run several servers, where you do not have the options of encountering even 1/10 of the games population. Massive Multiplayer seems to be defined by how many people you can fit on one server, that being 100, 1000, or what ever the server limits maybe.

            Theme vs Balance

  • MUD

When designing a guild/class/profession, all that went through my head was, what theme will I use. After developing a theme I would put together ideas/abilities that fit with the theme of the class. Balance rarely crossed my mind. When designing a class, the idea of balance was based upon the theme I chose.

I remember creating a race of symbiotic creatures simply know as the symbiotes (symbs). The idea behind the class was that a symbiotic creature combined with the host (your character). This creature was rather selfish and this help to influence what abilities your character had. Pets for example, the symbiote itself didnt work well with others, therefore you were not allowed to have pets or group with other players until you learned to control the impulses of the symbiote. The symbiote itself was treated as its own sentient entity, so when speaking there were no " i, me, my " it would be translated as "we, us, ours".

The symbiote was an internal entity and it focused on manipulating the character internally. We gave it abilities such as enhanced strength, regenerative functions, toxin filtering, etc. Healing spells that of a cleric actually hurt a symb, due to the symb not being a natural part of the players physiology, it was attacked by most healing functions. Symbs did not wear armor due to the symb itself being able to surface to the skin.

This is just one example of a guild created. We tried to create something unique. We tried to be creative. We tried to weave a players advantages and his weaknesses together in such a way that followed logic. WE tried to follow a theme. The theme of the guild was very important. We didnt just add abilities to balance power that did not fit with the theme of the the guild.

  • Graphical MMO

It seems that when designing class/guild/prof 's, most games go as generic as possible. They try to stick with the generic warrior/priest/mage/rogue concepts, rather than trying to be creative. They seem to entirely focus on the idea of balance and ignore the concept of a theme all together.

I believe WoW rogues will be the easiest tool to show the concept of theme vs balance and the lack of theme when creating this generic class. Rogues are a stealth class that can wield various weapons and wear light armor. Stealthing in WoW follows no logical concepts of the idea of stealthing  (someone can be staring at you while simply vanish). Stealth isnt much of a crutch for a rogue. What I mean by this is, if you removed stealth from the class, they would still function well due to a myriad of other abilities. They add abilities such as cloak of shadows to balance out the class for PvE, not realizing how absurd this ability is in PvP. When I try to think logically, why does a rogue have an ability to remove all magical affects from themself and become near immune for 5 seconds. Rogues are not magical by any means, so why give them anti-magical abilities. A mage can remove curses from himself. A mage is magical, so he should have some understanding on how to remove negative magical effects. A rogue has no magical abilities what so ever, so how do they understand how to remove them?

When I ponder a rogue class, I think poisons, daggers, stealthing, stealing, and squishy. Obviously, I do not believe that every attempt at creating a rogue class should follow the path of my ideas. Although I do believe every creation of every class should stick to a theme. So lets see how Blizzard gives rogues weaknesses then counters their own attempt...

Light Armor         --       Evasion                 50% dodge melee + missles

Snare                   --        Sprint/CloS          run 70% faster and breaks snare

Daggers              --         Expose armor     weapons that do light damage vs high armor

Traps                   --         Disarm trap

Range                  --          Crippling poison, deadly throw, sprint, stealth

Magic                    --           Cloak of Shadows

Rogues have options to fight every single class in the game as well as plenty of options to escape every single class in the game. If your about to ambush a caster, you have a poison specifically for that (lengthens casting times),  you will get the opener, you have kick to counter him casting as well as various stuns, when he finally does cast you have CloS to counter that. The only ability that can keep a rogue visible are bleeds and with consumables they can be removed (or if yer a dwarf), pretty much guaranteeing a rogues escape.

Summary

Where are the new an unique classes/guilds/profs. Why are we stuck with the same concepts over and over, warrior(tank), mage(nuker), rogue(stealther).

Every class should be defined by his advantages as well as weaknesses. Every class should stick with a THEME and not venture out into other classes themes just for the sake of so called " balance ". A class should not have a counter to every ability in the game.

Players want to feel as if they can have an effect on their environment. Players want the option to become well known among the games community. Players want to feel as if their voices are being heard.

 Sadly, I believe a MUD accomplishes more of what I want than todays graphical MMORPG's.

Does the Grind Exist?

Posted by t0nyd Tuesday December 18 2007 at 5:06PM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

 

  We use the word "grind" to describe anything that an mmo forces us to do (that we do not want to do) over a long period of time. Personally, PvE aspects of most mmo's do nothing for me. I prefer player vs player interaction over all else. Obviously this makes PvE a grind for me. I simply do not enjoy the simplicity of PvE that plagues mmo's today.

 I am going to stretch way back when, to when I used to play a MUD (multi user dungeon) by the name of Nirvana. For those that do not know, a mud is a text based mmorpg. Just like today, I tried to level fast. Leveling wasnt quite so boring back then due to me trying to kill the hardest mobs possible so I would level fast. In todays games, you are usually not rewarded for killing more difficult opponents. WoW as an example, yes you are rewarded by killing elites, but if you are going to stick with non-elite mobs, killing a mob your level is more rewarding than fighting something 5 levels above you due to the speed at which you kill the even level mob. Personally, I believe with greater risk should come greater reward. I actually enjoyed the greater risk. Occasionally Id die, instead of like in WoW, where you are pretty much safe.

 Back in those days on the mud, I would wait for hours just to ambush a player. In those days, PvP was frowned upon for the most part. I actually enjoyed the infamy.  There is nothing like a small community of players, where your actions actually make a difference. Where people actually know your name. You can become feared or cheered. This is an aspect missing in todays MMORPG world. Archlord attempted at elevating a player in the eyes of his peers. Im off topic a bit. Although you could look at these factors as alleviating the grind...

 Today in MMORPGs, we see the trend of monotonous monster killing for the sake of it being a time sink. Some people actually enjoy killing monsters endlessly to level (i assume). So I am fine with that option being there. I would prefer PvE to be spiced up a lot. Tabula Rasa made a valiant effort to spice up PvE combat. It feels as if mobs could be dropped on you at any time. I like this. I still find it a bit bland, but I believe its on the right track. Defending outposts from assault by npc/pc alike would add more flavor. If the sides are unbalanced then throw in more mob support. If its a fun experience, players will be less likely to be upset if they lose and more inclined to get right back in there and attempt to retake that outpost. Of course I threw PvP in there, because thats what I am looking for in a game. You could simply have NPC controlled outposts and NPC armies swarming in to take said outpost.

 Time shouldnt be seen as a punishment. You should enjoy every moment of playing your character. Every little thing you accomplish should help to define your character. There should be plenty of options for methods of advancement that you do not feel forced into one specific method.

  • Crafting --

               I believe equipment should matter, but not be above player skill. With that said I see most crafting systems as a useless grind. Every so often you get to craft an item or two thats actually useful. WoW is a good example of a horrible crafting system. Crafting should not be a monotonous time sink. Possibly a mini-game could be developed to entertain crafters. Craftable items should be useful in some way.

  • Leveling --

              There should be a complex leveling system. More difficult encounters should give more reward. The more risks you take the more you should gain. Leveling should also be possible through PvP.  PvP/PvE questing should exist. Accomplishing a goal, then being rewarded should exist. What I mean by this is that if you kill some special mob or do some special action out in the field, you should be able to get some reward for it. I guess you could call it a reverse quest,  accomplishing the goal before you are given the quest. Ultimately leveling shouldn't even be noticed until you level. Imagine leveling up and going "hey, i just leveled", instead of constantly watching your  EXP bar and dreading the hours its going to take...

  •  Group Friendly PvE/PvP

               A group should speed up the grind. I am tired of games that reduce exp gain due to you being in a group. If 2 players whack on a mob til it dies, they should get near or possibly the full exp due them. If multiple players kill a mob, and those players are not in a group, they should get near or possibly full exp for it. This would help to alleviate kill stealing. Also this helps in situations like in WoW, in duskwood when that big abomination attacks the town, all players involved should get exp for the encounter and not just the first player to attack it or the player that does the most damage.

-Summary

     MMORPG's focus on leveling because thats how they keep players. Most games have very underdeveloped end game goals/options, so much so that they usually spew forth endless expansion packs that extend the level maximum. In the end all they do is succeed at delaying the inevitability of having to create options for players at end game. When the grind has to come to an end,  a successful game should have plenty of options remaining at end game.

     The ideal MMORPG is enjoyable from level 1 to max level. The ideal MMORPG should be fun even if you skipped to max level. IThe ideal MMORPG has no grind due to the player enjoying nearly every step of the game.

( This posting is inspired by JB47394's posting. I do agree with a lot of the things he has to say)

the Crutch concept in MMO's

Posted by t0nyd Sunday December 16 2007 at 12:55AM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

 

 The term crutch seems used and abused when it comes to game mechanics that people dont like.

 

  • (insert name) ability is a crutch.

           Common uses...

            You wouldnt have won if you didnt use fear. Fear is such a crutch.

             You wouldnt have won if you werent  stealthed. Stealth is such a crutch.

           I think its to the point that if you have an ability that someone considers overpowered, its a crutch. I tend to define a class by its advantages and weaknesses. So my definition of a stealth class is that stealth should be a crutch. A stealther should be at optimum potential when he is stealthed and gets the opener. A stealther should be weakened if he is attacked first, thus defining the class based upon its weaknesses.

          I guess what im getting at is why do people say " thats such a crutch " with so much disdain? Is it simply a specific ability that annoys them or do they dislike classes having weaknesses and having the need to rely on specific abilities?

           

Skill based VS Class based, and the holes to both...

Posted by t0nyd Monday December 10 2007 at 6:58PM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

 

Im tired of seeing the same old PvP discussion about skill based vs class based themes.

Fallacy

  • Class based Games have to be paper, rock, scissors

              Im not sure why I keep seeing people post saying that class based games are all paper/rock/scissors based combat. I dont believe that DAoC is paper rock/scissors/based. Not all rogues beat all casters in DAoC.

  • Skill based games do not have a paper, rock, scissors element to them

              Skill based games are just as likey to be p/r/s as a class based game. The only way a skill based game isnt going to be p/r/s is if all skills are open to all players. Examples, if you choose to go light armor, staves, and spells, you just basically made a mage. So melee weapons are going to hit you harder than say a dude in full plate. The only diference between skill based and class based is with skill based YOU choose your specific weaknesses with each character where as in a class based system they are usually chosen for you.

 /end rant

PvP MMORPG's, are they real?

Posted by t0nyd Saturday December 8 2007 at 8:51PM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

 

 First off let me start by defining what I believe should be in a PvP MMORPG.

  • Level Advancement through PvP

              For me to call an MMORPG a PvP game, I want to be able to level from 1 to max through PvP. I am not saying that I believe no PvE should exist. I am just saying that I believe if I choose I should be able to gain EXP and advance through the killing of other players.

  • Questing through PvP

              Why does it always have to be kill (insert number) of pigs/rabbits. Why cant kill (insert number) of orcs mean orc players as well. Why cant there be a quest to take a keep from an opposing faction. Why do games never seem to include PvP quests at all. Im not talking WoW and its lame as hell BG quests. Personally I dont define real PvP as being in instances, but I will get to that later.

  • Gear obtainment through PvP

               Why must I waste countless hours killing generic mobs and running generic instances to get equipment just to compete at PvP. A nice shield should be a nice shield, but should it be so much better that it gives you 1000 more hps? How does a shield make you more health? What happened to the days of armor is armor in rpgs. Yeah, equipment should matter. The question is, how much should it matter? I believe skill should trump equipment any day. I also believe you should obtain useful equipment doing what it is that you like doing, be that crafting, killing mobs, or killing players.

  • World PvP and objectives

               Why do games avoid world PvP. Why do games avoid actual objectives in world PvP. Back when WoW was released I loved fighting over South Shore. To bad South Shore wasnt some objective. To bad SS and Tarren Mill couldnt be conquered by either faction. This might actually involve players enjoying themselves so we cant have that. Instead lets make little isolated areas called instances and lets have the players fight there. Also lets not have these little instances matter at all. Great concept, err no.

  • Player choice and skill trumps all

                I believe in the concept that your decisions when crafting and molding your character should have a big effect on how powerful your character becomes. I believe your choices, whether they be talents, attribute points, or skills should matter a lot more than what gloves you choose to wear. Should a majority of your hit points come from your gear or from the attributes that you chose to spend? I believe player choice should trump gear. If you choose to build a character with tons of hit points, i believe you should have that option and I dont believe it should simply come from your equipment. Altho we could go with the WoW simplicity of, the game spend your attribute points for you. Id prefer not.

  Oh well, just some ranting...:)

Is PC gaming dead?

Posted by t0nyd Saturday December 8 2007 at 2:44AM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

 As every month goes by I check for new PC games to be excited about. Lets just see how this year panned out.

Age of Conan -

  Pushed back. Sad day...

Warhammer -

  Pushed back. Sad day..

Spore -

   Pushed back. ....

Hellgate London -

    So not what I expected it to be. Its an ok game. I got a good month of playtime out of it before I became bored.

Soldier of Fortune Payback -

    Lets start with , I love SOF2 mp real damage infiltration. Wtf happened to this game. Everyone involved in its creation should be fired on the spot. No questions asked. Simply fired. I guess I can understand what they were thinking. Lets take all the key elements out of the game, no leaning, no chatting, no guid for tracking purposes, and drop all the fun too. Im at a total loss.

Tabula Rasa -

    I see what this game could have been. In my opinion they should have never released this game as is. They should have taken the time to fully develop the game. I wouldnt have released this game without adding another playable race that hate the bane as well as  humans. I would have added a PvP planet where humans, the bane, and the other playable race all vie for planet dominance. This PvP planet would be all out war. This PvP planet should allow for player built structures (bases). This could add an entire new dynamic to the game. I'm not saying its a bad game. I am just saying that I believe it is by no means a game that is ready for release.

LOTR -

    I have no idea why people play this game. The classes seem dull. The environments seem dull. The mobs seem dull. I would have thought one game with "please kill < insert number> of boars" quests would be enough.

Team Fortress -

    I got a solid couple of months out of this game. It was pretty fun. It was probably the only polished game ive played this year. I prefer more realistic FPS, so obviously it isnt going to hold my attention for long.

World of Warcraft -

    Lets add in another expansion pack. I pass. Id prefer that they refine the PvP system. Id prefer they take more time to balance the classes. Id prefer they would adjust class/race abilities that are so weak that they are useless. Id prefer they make world PvP fun again. Instead, lets just add more PvE content. Blah...

     This sums my year in PC gaming. Pretty much a disappointing year for me. There isnt an mmorpg that can keep my attention, well, besides logging into guild wars for a bit and hitting RA. I tried hitting shadow bane up and sadly its as close to what I want as any MMORPG out. It has plenty of classes and races. I love the loreplay server that actually puts restrictions on what races and classes can be in the same guild.


Oh well, I guess im done with MMO's for the time being. Hell for that matter PC gaming. I guess I still have SOF2 and Guild wars to toy around with until something new is released that actually entertains me.

** Just so its known, I do not play console games.