|23 posts found|
Currently playing EVE, SMITE, Wildstar, and Combat Arms
9/13/12 10:57:52 AM#21
Originally posted by VikingGamer
While I personally don't buy into the 'we have the right' angle, I do agree with the general sentiment that both players and devs could benefit from some way that interested parties can buy and maintain their own game servers.
The problem comes in when a bug or exploit is found or when the server operators want to update the game. Any programmer here can tell you what 8 years of code, written by multiple teams across changing development guidelines looks like. Who is going to support these servers? Who is going to update the content? And without maintenance or updates, who is going to still be playing after 6 months?
The 4th Coming was an MMO that seemed to be on track to deliver what a lot of MMORPG.com posters seem to want - pay for the server software, make your own changes and updates, and have paid support from the developers throughout the process. It dropped off the face of the earth about a decade ago and then resurfaced.
New Source Gaming recently tried that approach with Fasaria World and Knights of Dream City, but they seem to have recently dropped off the face of the earth, as well.
I'm hoping other devs go this direction. It means taking amssive leap with your brand and a support nightmare, though. More than likely any dev going that route will create something more along the lines of Explorations RPG, RealmCrafter or Big World since there is no point in creating a massive story and set range of content if the intent is to let a legion of virtual world admins change and break it.
"And wikipedia is as accurate as Britannica. Wikipedia is very reliable. You would be hard pressed to find a more reliable source for these kinds of things." -fovoroth
Players come for the game, but they stay for the people- Most Devs have forgotten this.
9/13/12 10:58:42 AM#22
Originally posted by romerok
I was about to say, have the clients tweaked so if you are playing a "offline/private" version then you can't even work with the online version..
But to the OP I would LOVE this option. I think it would be awesome to host a private server for friends and just play with them.
Hard Core Member
NGE, LOTRO, STO, KOTOR, Lego Star Wars > NGE 2 (SWTOR). SWG>ALL. Above hopefully subject to change.
OP 9/13/12 11:27:28 AM#23
Originally posted by Loktofeit
I am not saying that single player over multi-player is more fun, I am saying single player is better than nothing. I would happily frequent my houses and stuff in SWG, and go view the twin suns in SWG. But fortunatley with SWG there is better than this anyway ;)
But considering most games nowadays are catering more for a solo experience, then I see no difference.
If on the other hand MMOs get to be more like SWG with an open world and changing wordls, then it would be more worthwhile. If SWG was not so buggy and more solid it probably would have done better than WOW
City of Hereos is also a more multiplayer game
Basically each new MMO tends to be getting more single player than multiplayer.
At the end of the day I see no harm in adding any offline mode, as it would not interefre with the online game. If you do not want to play the offline modes then you can just ignore them, but it would make the MMOs more attractive, and has nothing to do with me being upset about City of Heroes or SWG, but more upset as there are no decent MMos coming out that hold a candle to these golden oldies - MMOs are becoming more like multiplayer online games but you have to pay a monthly fee for. I see no difference between the two types any more, except one you have to pay loads for, the other is free.