Originally posted by Zorndorf

Originally posted by metalhead980

Oh, I agree that WoWs cross server Bg's and Lfg queue mechanic would be wonderful in games like WAR that really struggled with population numbers.

Anyway we already have games out with full persistent worlds with no instances and games on the way that are similar.

I also think persistent world mmos or sandbox if you will requiring a massively hardcore playerbase is a myth. Im casual and log in for an hour or two get shit done WITH PEOPLE and log off.

As for what makes a game a Success. Imo a successful game is one that can fill a server and deliver content( decent sized patches every 6 months atleast).

Even small 30k sub games can do that.

 

Look at yourself: you hop in , play for 2 hours and log out. The vast majority of players play like that and their number is growing. Very few people live in their mother's basement these days to game for 12 hours non stop. Let alone they will all play the same game.

You can't possibly think that 30K sub based games can offer this 24/7.

Fantasy based MMO servers can only hold 4K players on average. Divide them by time - space - level or whatever grade and you end up with empty worlds. Bye bye group based play.

Answer is to regroup and make avalailable group based play 24/7.

It doesn't even exclude RvR on realms. You could easely find a mechanism that coupled server based PvP with clustered BG's. Or just do cross server dungeons like Blizz will do in patch 3.3.

You have to offer ALL these days: AND freedom AND open seamless worlds AND instances AND limited RvR zones with massive battles in one or two concentrated zones ...  to keep the game going. And we ALL know which game is doing this.

----

30K subs games are as dead as a rock btw. They are run by a monkey pushing the server restart button when the light flashes red.

 

Yes, WoW, except the freedom part.   Your definition of ALL that a game need to offer are rather specific, I wonder why that is?

I've said all I need to say, most of the people on this forum who pay attention to names know what you do on forums.

Zorndorf: Thanks.

If a game has dungeons, as you say, I think this would be a good idea if the game worlds are split up into different servers. I am also a firm believer of trying to get all players on one shard (server cluster) like EvE. But I do think that a battleground clustered servers is a good idea.

Montaronx:

The persistance that you talk about is great for an MMO. What many games lack is an actual persistant world that can be built or destroyed by the players through normal play or live events.

Another point I want to stress, even though this is not a coded feature for a game, per se, but what I feel is need is a live events team for an MMO that helps bring meaning to a player's world as well as persistance to a game. This is something that Ryzom did very well, especially when hosted with Jolt, that helped keep its core playerbase to the game.

Originally posted by metalhead980

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Originally posted by metalhead980

Oh, I agree that WoWs cross server Bg's and Lfg queue mechanic would be wonderful in games like WAR that really struggled with population numbers.

Anyway we already have games out with full persistent worlds with no instances and games on the way that are similar.

I also think persistent world mmos or sandbox if you will requiring a massively hardcore playerbase is a myth. Im casual and log in for an hour or two get shit done WITH PEOPLE and log off.

As for what makes a game a Success. Imo a successful game is one that can fill a server and deliver content( decent sized patches every 6 months atleast).

Even small 30k sub games can do that.

 

Look at yourself: you hop in , play for 2 hours and log out. The vast majority of players play like that and their number is growing. Very few people live in their mother's basement these days to game for 12 hours non stop. Let alone they will all play the same game.

You can't possibly think that 30K sub based games can offer this 24/7.

Fantasy based MMO servers can only hold 4K players on average. Divide them by time - space - level or whatever grade and you end up with empty worlds. Bye bye group based play.

Answer is to regroup and make avalailable group based play 24/7.

It doesn't even exclude RvR on realms. You could easely find a mechanism that coupled server based PvP with clustered BG's. Or just do cross server dungeons like Blizz will do in patch 3.3.

You have to offer ALL these days: AND freedom AND open seamless worlds AND instances AND limited RvR zones with massive battles in one or two concentrated zones ...  to keep the game going. And we ALL know which game is doing this.

----

30K subs games are as dead as a rock btw. They are run by a monkey pushing the server restart button when the light flashes red.

 

I think people are too stuck on WoW sub numbers. WoW is a fine game and everything but it's had a negative effect on the genre. We used to play games and not give a shit about numbers. We socialized, played and logged off. All I ever cared about was if my server had enough people to group with and kill.

This was when MMO subs at 10-15k were fine lol. I really think MMOs are going to revert back and start delivering a much more diverse crop of Games for people to play. just look at the last five years of MMOs all just copies of WoW sooner or later someone will break this capycat shit and give us a unique experience.

The whole problem with this thread is there shouldn't be one feature every game is required to have. WoWs corss server system is nice but in the future im sure many games will be totally different than todays mmos.

We will see persistent world and even more story centric instanced games. So no I stand by what I said and I think that one particular feature is totally dependant on the type of mmo.

Whether you think a more open world and less casual experience will work or not or be a success is a moot point.  because as history has already shown us games with small communities are thriving. Look at UO its been  around forever with what 50-75k subs? That game certainly wouldn't benefit from a cross server queue, I know Eve wouldn't and that game is a huge success and a leader of innovation.

New games like ER and MO have no need for it either. You can't possibly believe sandbox games will be gone in the future?

As for not being able to group in small pop games. I can log into Ryzom right now at 4:02am in NYC and get a hunting party within 10 minutes and Ryzom is a game with 5-10k players across three servers. Also one of the games that wouldn't need your feature.

 

 

^^ this and /golf clap 

The only thing an MMO needs is the ability for players to communicate and interact in the same world. The mind set of "need" just leads to pigeon-holing oneself into things that have already been done.

Originally posted by Zorndorf

OP: great thread created.

After Blizzcon I was stunned by the fact Blizzard announced a very simple mechanic that all future releases should have:

Clustered dungeon servers. All servers (or parts of) regroup players of every server to do common dungeon crawling.

Oh I see alright the haters coming out of their caves (it will KILL immersive realm worlds etc), but it is a very practical solution to regroup players. A problem every fantasy mmorpg is facing.

Like the clustered server battlegrounds created an ever launching number of Battlefields 24/24 hours, the dungeon crawlers will just love this for every dungeon throughout the game.

Of course the world behind it must still be seamless and open and you can STILL have realm specific fights, but for the sheer play mechanism, this is a boost to ANY mmo with dungeon crawling.

I think games like Diablo3 - as a pure hack/slash dungeon crawler - will benefit even more from this, but anyhow ALL future MMO's are all about hopping in and ... just game in groups. You can't do that with 4K people on one server.

 

EQ2 implemented a form of clustered servers.  What they did  was if a zone was overcrowded, they made a duplicate of that zone and you could switch between different versions of the same zone.  Popular areas might have several duplicates, whereas unpopular areas only had one version running.  It allowed more players on the same server.

Other games have also had duplicates when overcrowded.  However, these games duplicated all areas, not just the overcrowded parts.

Instances is another way for many people to do the same dungeon simultaneously.

I too, would like to see the server barrier disappear that  prevents people on different servers from sharing the adventure.

Originally posted by thorwood

Originally posted by Zorndorf

OP: great thread created.

After Blizzcon I was stunned by the fact Blizzard announced a very simple mechanic that all future releases should have:

Clustered dungeon servers. All servers (or parts of) regroup players of every server to do common dungeon crawling.

Oh I see alright the haters coming out of their caves (it will KILL immersive realm worlds etc), but it is a very practical solution to regroup players. A problem every fantasy mmorpg is facing.

Like the clustered server battlegrounds created an ever launching number of Battlefields 24/24 hours, the dungeon crawlers will just love this for every dungeon throughout the game.

Of course the world behind it must still be seamless and open and you can STILL have realm specific fights, but for the sheer play mechanism, this is a boost to ANY mmo with dungeon crawling.

I think games like Diablo3 - as a pure hack/slash dungeon crawler - will benefit even more from this, but anyhow ALL future MMO's are all about hopping in and ... just game in groups. You can't do that with 4K people on one server.

 

EQ2 implemented a form of clustered servers.  What they did  was if a zone was overcrowded, they made a duplicate of that zone and you could switch between different versions of the same zone.  Popular areas might have several duplicates, whereas unpopular areas only had one version running.  It allowed more players on the same server.

 

Other games have also had duplicates when overcrowded.  However, these games duplicated all areas, not just the overcrowded parts.

Instances is another way for many people to do the same dungeon simultaneously.

I too, would like to see the server barrier disappear that  prevents people on different servers from sharing the adventure.

What Zondorf says is a great idea.

What SOE did in EQ2 was very different and in a bad way... it wasn't anything server cluster at all, it was creating different instances in the SAME server and it's the crappiest idea SOE has ever had. Wait.. scratch that.

edit: forgot to say the dead bird story was very funny. BAM! dead bird! Amazing

Originally posted by altairzq

edit: forgot to say the dead bird story was very funny. BAM! dead bird! Amazing

I have a feeling we may hear, "This MMO needs more dead bird" passed around now. In fact, I'll put that in my sig. xD

Originally posted by SvenDryden

 

---

Originally posted by xaldraxius
If your 20 man raid party wipes at the raid boss he should get to keep their stuff and it should add to his treasure pile, or, if it's better than what he has, he could use it himself.

---

 

You know xaldraxius, this would be great!  I've only seen this done somewhat similarly once. 

If any of you played Asheron's Call back in the day (or now, but who does that!)  Then you might remember that with every mob, not just bosses, if they kill a player or another mob (that happened) then they would get XP. 

In the open world, some mobs would level quite a bit and continually be tougher to kill by players, but when killed would give a bigger XP reward than the original and I think likewise the loot table would deliver better rewards because of the increased level of the threat.
 

So it wouldn't actually have to be that the boss keeps all the loot, but that it levels up and gives greater rewards to the next adventurers.

My 2 pyreals,
-Sven
 

Asherons Call also had changing environments.. It would turn to fall for awhile, then it would snow over most of the land for winter, then go through spring and back to summer (Edit: Also forgot to mention for those of you who remember, during halloween scarecrows and pumpkins would come out, and during the winter they had snowmen!).  I liked that a lot, made the world feel a lot more realistic... man that game did a lot of things right considering it was before the big boom of mmorpgs.  Best game ever imo, kinda wanna go play it now but I know it just wouldn't be the same!

Hmm. I have heard some good things about AC. Are the devs working on a new game?

Ctrl-V and Ctrl-P in the chat window FFS!

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Hmm. I have heard some good things about AC. Are the devs working on a new game?

I'm not sure if they are working on a new game or not.  But AC to this day is the only game that I NEVER hit max level after playing for like 4 or 5 years (max level was hard to obtain for many back then) but still had a boatload of fun.. that was the beauty of the game, there was so much content for all levels you didn't need to hit the "End Game" because for many the End Game was actually then end and would reroll and start leveling someone else.

Originally posted by metalhead980

A chat system

everything else is optional depending on the type of game.

Oh hell i can do without a chat system, yeah i know it's covenient and people will just set up voip servers etc but i'd like to see a proximity based communication system.

No more listening to noobs discussing how 733t they are, lonely mouth breathers proclaiming their need for dps or heals, some guy pretending to be a girl flirting with the entire zone in a way that would make a hooker blush .... i can do without that.

Guess what you wanna meet someone, go to a towna and pay an npc to deliver a letter to them, with a time and a place ... go their and then endlessly discuss your mini/maxi tactics.

Wanna team up, go to the town center and shout and if i don;t want to listen to you i just leave town.

Maybe i'm comming off a tad grumpy ....... good

Originally posted by MacScarfe

 

Oh hell i can do without a chat system, yeah i know it's covenient and people will just set up voip servers etc but i'd like to see a proximity based communication system.

One thing I do when I'm in an RP mood while playing WoW is turn off all channels except /say and /whisper (I leave that on, so friends can contact me when they come online). It really helps with the immersion if you can only 'hear' people who are nearby. As you suggest - go to the inn or local square if you want to get people's attention.

Originally posted by altairzq

Originally posted by thorwood

Originally posted by Zorndorf

OP: great thread created.

After Blizzcon I was stunned by the fact Blizzard announced a very simple mechanic that all future releases should have:

Clustered dungeon servers. All servers (or parts of) regroup players of every server to do common dungeon crawling.

Oh I see alright the haters coming out of their caves (it will KILL immersive realm worlds etc), but it is a very practical solution to regroup players. A problem every fantasy mmorpg is facing.

Like the clustered server battlegrounds created an ever launching number of Battlefields 24/24 hours, the dungeon crawlers will just love this for every dungeon throughout the game.

Of course the world behind it must still be seamless and open and you can STILL have realm specific fights, but for the sheer play mechanism, this is a boost to ANY mmo with dungeon crawling.

I think games like Diablo3 - as a pure hack/slash dungeon crawler - will benefit even more from this, but anyhow ALL future MMO's are all about hopping in and ... just game in groups. You can't do that with 4K people on one server.

 

EQ2 implemented a form of clustered servers.  What they did  was if a zone was overcrowded, they made a duplicate of that zone and you could switch between different versions of the same zone.  Popular areas might have several duplicates, whereas unpopular areas only had one version running.  It allowed more players on the same server.

 

Other games have also had duplicates when overcrowded.  However, these games duplicated all areas, not just the overcrowded parts.

Instances is another way for many people to do the same dungeon simultaneously.

I too, would like to see the server barrier disappear that  prevents people on different servers from sharing the adventure.

What Zondorf says is a great idea.

What SOE did in EQ2 was very different and in a bad way... it wasn't anything server cluster at all, it was creating different instances in the SAME server and it's the crappiest idea SOE has ever had. Wait.. scratch that.

 

edit: forgot to say the dead bird story was very funny. BAM! dead bird! Amazing

SoE's EQ2 was an early attempt to apply what Zondorf said about dungeons to outside permanent areas.  While some did not like it, it was innovative and the best implementation I have seen to date. Many games  make no attempt to manage population in the outside areas.  As a result you end up with areas that are overpopulated with players, and other areas that are almost empty. For example, when I played Horde on WoW, almost all areas were empty of Horde players with the exception of The Barrens and the capital cities.

With the current improvements in technology, someone will come up with a better solution that used by SOE in EQ2.

I would like to see clustering applied in some form to the "permanent" areas as well.  For example, in old games where the newbie areas are usually very low population, some form of clustering for the newbie experience would be beneficial so the world did not seem so empty.