| 130 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
I hope Star Vault pulls it off, this game sounds great! |
|
|
To those who think this game will fail, you can not deny that this game sounds great. These games are trying to establish a new breed of gameplay. Its not easy. Bloodworth is "critizing" SV for an attempt to bring something new to the table. Clearly bloodworth was once one of the optimists cause he likes to read about these games. He has some kinda hope, but the rest of his hope was most likely broken and crushed in his previous searches for the "right" game. After a series of dissappointments I wouldn't blame bloodworth for feeling hurt. He's just mad at the world cause he cant find his place. It's just dissappointing to see people hate on others for trying to accomplish what no one has. I support SV. If they fail...damn. But i won't start crying and hating whatever comes next. |
|
Originally posted by quitschool
Well said and good post. Until then we have to pray and hope. Maybe one day a AAA company will try to cater to this long neglected niche audience. The market is currently over-saturated in casual-themepark mmo's. Meanwhile, sandbox type players are frothing at the mouth for anything. |
|
|
They can talk the talk but can they walk the walk, I guess that's the question right now. Also, briefly to place a counter-argument to those championing realism. A game set in medieval fantasy setting cannot justify anything by stating it is a way to create realism. There is no realism in dragons, trolls, giants or minotaurs the last I checked nor was that the case during medieval times either contrary to the popular belief. The day someone starts casting in Mortal Online you can justify world maps as well in this setting as in EVEs case, there is no form of pseudo-realism preventing you. You can say it is a design choice but for the sake of muffin, don't say it is a case of realism.
The realism also leads to another concern of mine -- the viability of non-adventurous gameplay. From what I understood from the interview, the Secondary skills are the ones you unlock after mastering your Primary ones. In this very same pseudo-real world they are touting, it ought to be possible for one to be just a simple gatherer, but if you have to unlock your way to gathering by learning Primary skills (that strongly seem to lean on fighting based on this interview) it renders everyone an adventurer. Where's the realism in that? Also, in which world of realism killing, admittedly neutral, gatherer in the wilderness makes you a criminal? You killed someone and noone saw and noone really cares either -- the least that merchant or other NPC in town willing to make a living.
All-in-all, based on this interview and some semi-indolent forums browsing, the realism is a glorified facade built up by the developer to justify design decisions. As has been noted on other messages in this very same thread, this realism is driving players away from the game for no apparent reason. Making the game "difficult" is solely a synonym for saying that you are making the game time-consuming as the difficulty in the game is relative to the time consumed by your fellow players. Albeit you, as a game developer, would want to create a niche game it still might be rational to be reasonable as of for what reasons you are seeking that nichedom. Realism ain't one. |
|
|
Looks like a game that will succeed. They are not aiming big, they are using ideas that they know will work instead of random features, and they are approaching it with realistic goals. Compared to many MMOs out there, this looks like a game which knows where it is going and will not be relying on massive revenue to keep it going. |
|
Originally posted by Harkkum You are taking word realism too far. Its supposed be realism as in being immersed in that fantasy world not realism as in "huh a freakin' troll?" Take a step back. They are not trying to simulate life. As for the design decisions, you're saying SV is saying "ah whatever we'll just call it realism so we dont have to design this a certain way." I dont see whats so decieving about their design decisions.
|
|
|
What Mats is speaking about is not really "realism" but more "credibility", Mats as the creative designer of the game tends to create a credible fantasy world, AND use it to explain design decision. Of course it can't be perfect, there would still be an UI, a mouse, a keyboard, and a screen. And of course they have to weight the "credibility" vs the "fun" Take the example of the map. In MO there will be no map given at start, fact. From a fun point of view : This allow to create a new profession never seen before in a MMO : Mapmaker, and may be why not the ability to enchant the map so that it will give you your position on the map (speculation about map enchanting, but i believe a dev said something about it). Then your typical GPS find its explanation in the MO world.
So yeah we can say he use "credibility" (or "realism" whatever) to "mask" design decision, but it is beforehand made to create a new form of fun you'd not expected (for instance, if you get lost without a compass/map, you'll have to look for a hill/mountain to see your surroundings, or why not try to guess your position from the sun etc. |
|
|
While I have often agreed with Bloodworth, this time I actually disagree. I think, mostly because he is jaded with recent ventures into this niche. I can't really blame him. However, the one thing that Talos and SV have is the same thing that led to CCP becoming great. A relatively honest set of talking heads, being the first. Second being that by recognizing that they need to aim small, and deal with that group, that if they did it the best they can, the game will grow over time. This is how EVE has turned from such a niche game, into what is considered a AAA title. Will MO be all it can potentially be from day one? Not on your life. Even the devs in the interview said such. However, it does have the mechanics in place to evolve into something extremely rewarding over the years, just like EVE. And is all that the devs are gunning for. Point of everything? Those of us that have been watching it's development from day one, for the past few years, will recognize the real value in the game (as long as the official launch is relatively successful). Others that are just hearing about it, just won't understand it until they take it upon themselves to really pay attention to it's history. That last part is what doomed Darkfall, by the way. It's history coupled with arrogant lies by Tasos is really what doomed DF in the early stages. Perhaps this is why SV is such a breath of fresh air to some of us. ----------------------- Played- SWG (pre-cu), AoC, VG, WoW, LoTRO,CoX, EQ2, DAOC, GW, PotBS Playing- EVE, Jade Dynasty, RoM, Aion, SUN Waiting for- MO, Tera, APB, TOR, DCO, Jumpgate Evo, Black Prophecy, Dawntide, Cities XL, WH40K, WWE, Alganon, NASA |
|
|
rounner
 Hard Core Member
Joined: 9/07/06
Some are born to sweet delight. |
I realise it's polite to not mention darkfall, but whats more important, being polite or being successful? There are problems with darkfall which this game needs to honestly confront. For example, how can anyone seriously play sandbox style without relying on an entire guild to baby sit them? In my opinion sandbox and ffa pvp full loot are mutually exclusive. The only solution I know of is a world so big to dilute the majority of players that simply wish to pvp everyone thats weaker than them. That introduces problems of forming groups, content and travel. These are the sort of things I'd like to read the developer addressing. Take the most boring, least creative, least strategic and most heavily scripted parts of rpgs and ditch everything else and there you have MMOs today. - Fennris |
|
Infalible
 Advanced Member
Joined: 10/03/07
The ability to focus attention on important things is a defining characteristic of intelligence. |
His sole aim in a lot of the answers was to label anything that DIDN'T feature in Mortal Online as casual-friendly or as being too niche for a niche. Another of his aims was clearly to wave a hand of perceived superiority and dismal at any game that includes anything the resembles any of the steps forward that has been taken in the MMO genre. "Be gone, vile pest! Your ingenuity abhors my archaic mind." He could replace the entirety of his responses with a single sentence repeated over and over again - "Marketing bullshit goes here." This guy has a level of arrogance reserved only for those individuals who's only over-powering trait is arrogance. I can think of another man with exactly the same quality, who managed to lie and cheat his way into total failure. I wonder if any of you can guess who he is? I'd bet on Mortal Online tanking badly ;-) |
Originally posted by rounner
It was stated that, at least ideally, the real huge difference between being able to gank (pvping with someone obviously weaker) should only take about a week or so. This being in the primary skillset. They are aiming for gear and secondary skills to not make so much of a difference that someone who, while still considered a noob to the game, can still beat someone who is not as used to this form of combat. It's kind of like EVE in that respect. If you know what you are doing, and the "vet" doesn't, you still stand a fighting chance. On a side note though, I fully expect naked pvping until people get used to the mechanics enough to risk their real armours. This is just because of dealing with real people's insecurities. ----------------------- Played- SWG (pre-cu), AoC, VG, WoW, LoTRO,CoX, EQ2, DAOC, GW, PotBS Playing- EVE, Jade Dynasty, RoM, Aion, SUN Waiting for- MO, Tera, APB, TOR, DCO, Jumpgate Evo, Black Prophecy, Dawntide, Cities XL, WH40K, WWE, Alganon, NASA |
|
Originally posted by Mrbloodworth These three things are, but the rest make sense. Since when do these things take away from reality? Oh, I'm so sorry I saved you a couple of unnecessary clicks by letting you auto loot. It obviously breaks the immersion greatly. Auto-loot distribution? I'm assuming he means rolling Need or Greed? How is that really a bad thing? And auction houses being unrealistic... maybe. If you want to be really specific about it, the idea of a globally linked auction system wasn't possible in Medieval times. But postal services and whatnot were around. I guess some city auction houses, that aren't linked to other cities, would be more realistic. Fine, why not do that then? Better than running through a town's market and being bombarded with player-store spam. Other than this, I liked the interview though. Especially how skills will work and the idea of NPC Guilds.
|
|
Originally posted by quitschool You are taking word realism too far. Its supposed be realism as in being immersed in that fantasy world not realism as in "huh a freakin' troll?" Take a step back. They are not trying to simulate life. As for the design decisions, you're saying SV is saying "ah whatever we'll just call it realism so we dont have to design this a certain way." I dont see whats so decieving about their design decisions.
It was moreso a reference to their other comments where immersion and realism weightened against features which would have admittedly been more casual-player-friendly. The realism is a double-edged blade, so to say, and I do fully understand your claims on credibility and immersive gameplay. It just cannot be the driving force of other game features that are clearly and admittedly alienating for the majority of players -- even according to their own testimony. This was what I refered by realism not being worth the nichedom when all it really is, is a subjective play with words. The game world can be as immersive and credible with pink fluffy bunnies and teddy bears marching yet they decided otherwise. And I think most of us can say that Oblivion was immersive enough eventhough it had also a chance for third person camera angle.
In sum, what I am trying to say is that their design choices are curious and alienating for no apparent reason other than touted realism, which, according to you and everyone else, is nothing but a lipservice to the notion of reality as perceived in, well, reality. Therefore, you cannot say elsewhere that something is realism (say, not being able to single-handedly kill a dragon) where you elsewhere deny that realism is not realism per se (saying that of course there are dragons, for it is no real realism). Tricky thing this realism is. |
|
Explaining whole flagging system is very hard, as Matts already mentioned. As a side note, freshbies won't be killable for first 20 ingame hours. This will lower some sick cases like those so frequently called "gankfests". Get a life. Jumping on a newb may bring surprising effects, like being killed by own gankmate. Nvm, as there is going to be plenty more better things to do than sitting in front of gate, waiting for a newb who is trying to sell squirrel tails, for sake of buying couple additional arrows.
How real is an AH in medieval mmorpg ? You people lack the imagination to have fun playing a game focused on player to player interaction. Not player to environment (AI systems), on which are based most (99%?) of mmogs.
-- Remember, your advantage lies in your opponent's weakness (J) |
|
|
Originally posted by joshe You don't have to go to the auction house. Look at WoW. Do people still offer their services in trade? Of course, because the AH prices are non-negotiable. The only thing you have slight control over is how much you want to bid, but the seller still sets the starting price. Talking with someone face-to-face to see what they're selling (especially crafters) can be done even with an AH system in the game. What the AH does is it prevents people spamming their wares 24/7. It provides a central place to buy goods. Why is that bad? Look at it as the Medieval market rather than a single building. As for your second point... you're saying that if you lost your gear, you'd like friendly crafters to provide you with replacements if you don't have any? That's your choice. Or you could check out the AH and see what's there. More likely than not, in the AH you'd have to spend a lot more. If you took the time to seek out friendly crafters who'd make it for free or for cheap, then you're repaid with a lower cost. The best option would probably be to craft your own gear of course, but would you really like to sit there and yell, "Looking for ______ for my new leather armor! Please, does anyone have any? I just ran out of stock!" when you could take a quick trip to the "market" and buy it? The choice should be there. I'm not arguing for a globally linked world-wide AH system (that is a bit unrealistic), but no AH/market at all is to the detriment of the player.
|
|
|
daarco
 Hard Core Member
Joined: 12/19/06
I have Darkfall now! |
MO is just a ordinary Swedish pen and paper RPG, as a MMO. I will play it next to Darkfall : ) |
Originally posted by MMOGuru
I sure hope that isn't true.
Until it releases everyone can enjoy this video. |
|
Originally posted by daarco I like Swedish pen and paper RPGs. I still wont order it before they releases it however but it sounds interesting :) |
|
|
People who are claiming that MO is so original need to brush up on their MMO history. The only thing this game has that wasn't done 20 years ago is first person view, and that's because the games that did this first were in text. The reason people make "casual" or "easy" MMOs is because that's the kind most people want to play. Saying you are making a game that is "hardcore" or requires "skill" is mostly just aspirational marketing; it's designed to appeal to players who see themselves as "highly skilled". Really making a game that is "hardcore" or requires "skill" is stupid because most players, yes even those who see themselves as skilled, don't have very much skill at all. It's the nature of a player skill system that the very few who really are highly skilled will totally dominate everyone else. Even if this tiny minority of highly skilled players were enough to sustain your game commercially (hint: it's not) they won't stick around for long without a healthy supply of wannabes to prey on. |
|
Originally posted by Mrbloodworth
'No real developer?' I'm interested to know what qualifies you to pass judgment on who is a 'real' developer and who is not. I guess the $150 I gave to StarVault for a couple of pre-orders wasn't real money, since they aren't real developers. Similarly, I suppose the beta I've been in is a figment of my imagination. Lol. The only thing 'full of fail' in this thread is your (lack of) logic, oh and your grammar. Next troll please. |
|
Where in the interview was this game pitched as "hardcore"? Or is that how you perceived the interview? I'm not understanding the vitriol from people that this game isn't even aimed at. Mats clearly stated that the game will appeal to a niche group of players. You don't like something about the game. OK. The game isn't for you then. Move on. Nothing is accomplished by getting your panties in a wad over it. I take that back. The only thing that is accomplished is you vented your nerd rage. Current: Ryzom, DFO |
|
|
No targeting, first-person view, character collision and hit boxes also means tactical manoeuvres and training in groups becomes very important. You cannot have archers or mages randomly sending in projectiles or AOE's into the midst of battle as they risk hitting their own. Furthermore it's possible to really use the environment by taking advantage of line-of sight, choke points, terrain height etc. That sounds like Darkfall and that's where I see a problem... When a player stood in front of another player to get you flagged was a big problem or when hunting with a group and accidentally hitting a group member. I hope they pull it off but this has been tried this way and failed because of those issues but we'll see. I would of rather them made a 2d UO style of game honestly. |
|
You should take to heart what you spout at others in other threads:
Current: Ryzom, DFO |
|
|
I am a little aprehensive about the lack of a map.
It may be cool to actually get lost in an mmo, but when guilds / groups are trying to coordinate things it seems like it would be more of an annoyance. As far as I am concerned, if you are going to give people coordinates, then you might as well give them an arrow to indicate where they are.
Annoying people for the sake of 'realism' in a game seems pretty foolish in my mind. If it isn't fun then why bother. |
|
Originally posted by Nihilist
I think the point is that the type of people likely to be annoyed by attempts at realism aren't the intended audience. He's pretty clear about that in the interview. Why is guild/group coordination more important than the immersiveness of a solo explorer or a couple of hunters out there trying to make a living off of pelts? There are plenty of other games out there that don't give a shit about immersiveness, let us have this one. |
|
