Originally posted by omgthisnamesux

Originally posted by azzamasin

Originally posted by omgthisnamesux

To OP:

Can you describe non-linear questing, or your interpretation of it?  Some people associate it to level and some people associate it to quest hubs.

MMO's: Asheron's Call and GW2 also Neverwinter's Foundry Content (currently leveling up my TR through 100% Foundry missions)

Single Player Games: Skyrim/Oblivian/Morrowind, Just Cause 2 and Two Worlds 2

 

By your definition, Wildstar will not have Linear questing.  There will be level ranges associated to Zones - like GW2, but you are free to perform any activities within those zones that you wish to in any order.  They also confirmed that you do not have to return to, or initially go to quest hubs to even pick up quests.  You may be running through an area and decide to skip the town, and you will receive a "Call" from one of the quest mobs in the town on your radio saying like "hey, while you're out there, if you want to do X - and let me know when it's done, i'll give you a reward".....

 

Thus, you are only limited by the content level, the same as all of the other games you described.  Thus, but your definition, it is a non-linear game.

Well then now I am back on board.  Was afraid it was going to be another WoW/Rift/SWTOR clone with no deviation off the main storyline and going from quest hub to quest hub.

Thanks for clearing up the confusion.

Originally posted by KingofHartz
This is really cool and would be something I wouldnt mind seeing in every game I play. Even though f2p keeps me from playing this game, the foundry idea gets a plus one from me. Pretty cool guys.

F2P is the main reason to play the game.  Subscriptions are dieing and within 10 more years it will become an obsolete business model so better embrace it!

Originally posted by Myrdynn

there is one in development but I cant remember the name, made by a couple of AC 1 Devs

maybe someone else remembers the name

here you go

http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/10/03/project-gorgon-hits-kickstarter/

Project Gorgon

here is the games site

http://www.eldergame.com/

Thank you very much, never heard of this.

Sad that Kickstarters like CU get funded, but even more sadder that they get all the hype and a game such as Project Gorgon goes unnoticed.  Sad sad sad.

Originally posted by Livnthedream

Originally posted by azzamasin

 

Just because there is quest lines doesn't mean there is linearity in design.  I've played 4 different characters in Skyrim, my latest being a level 142, 2H/Destruction build and I have yet to follow the main storyline past Whiterun.  Running off in a particular direction and finding content and quests is the hall mark of TES games and is how ESO is being designed as well.

Sort of. There is that pesky problem in Eso that you have no soul and need to complete that single player questline to get it back. Honestly though I would disagree with the "linear" comment, as you can choose not to do a number of quests in a number of games that claimed to be linear. Eso is still split by zone with classic level ranges in each one. Wildstar is doing just as good a job of breaking that up as what has been said of Eso.

Chosing not to do the main quest is an option in any TES game as it is in GW2.

Being split by zone has no bearing that within the zone I am on I can wander off and discover content for me to explore.  Also you could disagree all yo uwant but theres only been a hand few of MMO's that allowed you to level and explore at about the same pace regardless of following the scripted themepark ride.  Games like WoW, Rift, SWTOR and most like Wildstar will only allow you to follow the mainstory or quest hub design to level efficiently.  Can you do it without following the quest hubs? sure but at a fraction of the speed and scale as following the main path.  ESO, NWO, GW2 can all be leveled as quick as and efficiently off the beaten path as on it.  To me this is the hall mark of a successful game.  Linear Storylines set within a non linear world because of not in spite of.

While I have enjoyed many MMO's I will always consider Asheron's Call the most superior MMO ever made.  It would be nice to see an actual spiritual successor to such an amazing game.

Or at the very least I want to see a 3rd person, WASD movement, Action Adventure Diablo style game.

Make is happen please.

Originally posted by rojo6934

Originally posted by BearKnight
It's NOT an MMO though. It is a Diablo Action RPG. You can't call that an MMO, it isn't one :).

i havent played it and wont play it but ill say this. If its just a coop thing then its not an mmo. If its a massively multiplayer game in a persistent world then its an mmo. As far as i know its an action rpg like diablo with multiplayer loby like vindictus. If that is the case then it is not an mmo.

That is exactly what it is.  Its a Diablo, Torchlight, Path of Exile clone.

Much to my chagrin I spent 12 hour downloading the client for the Open Beta and much to my chagrin I discovered this is not an MMO it is an ARPG.  /Sad Panda.

/uninstall

Originally posted by olepi

I didn't vote, just started the game.

I've played a Cleric and a Control Wizard to lvl 5 or so, and there is almost no difference that I can tell. They both are "blasters" in the old CoH term, casting attacks at 1 per second. The Cleric could kill most stuff with 2 shots. The Cleric plays totally different than any other Cleric I've played, and seems to really just be a Wizard with a different graphic and a small healing side effect.

I hope the other classes aren't so similar, and that they become different later in the game.

Please play longer.  Level 5 hasn't even acquired their 2nd encounter power yet. 

Originally posted by SupportPlayerMM

With the talk about removing Tank & Healer it presents a more "Open" style of play I presume even though everyone fills every role and you lose the need for groups so how about the opposite side of the coin why not remove rangers, rogues, mages and w/e else and only keep clerics and tanks with 2 specs.

Tank - Defense (Like any tank ever) Tank Offense - 2 Hand DPS tank or AoC Guardian Tank

Cleric - Defense (Heals & Buffs) Cleric - Offense (Most dps casting, less heals/buffs)

 

then you absolutely need each other and you still fit every role other than stealth.

 

rofl... just saying this actually seems like a much better version than the no tank/cleric setup

Adding roles into a group composition is the answer not subtracting them.

Group makeup's should consist of a Tank, Healer, Crowd Controller,  Buffer, Off Tank, Off healer, AOE DPS'er, and Burst DPS'er.  In theory 8-9 player groups should be the norm, not the exception.

Originally posted by Livnthedream

Originally posted by azzamasin

Originally posted by ShakyMo
My guess is no, the main bulk will be wow style quest hubs. There will be things dotted around you can discover eq2/rift style that give you bonus xp / gear.

Was afraid of this, makes it an almsot 100% deal breaker to me.  Guess it all depends when WS and ESO come out then.  Cause I already know ESO will have non-linear questing.

Wut? Eso has similar questing to Skyrim, which is just as hub focused as Wildstar. Every hold had atleast 5-6 quests associated with it, and thats ignoring the chains from the Jarl's themselves.

Just because there is quest lines doesn't mean there is linearity in design.  I've played 4 different characters in Skyrim, my latest being a level 142, 2H/Destruction build and I have yet to follow the main storyline past Whiterun.  Running off in a particular direction and finding content and quests is the hall mark of TES games and is how ESO is being designed as well.

Originally posted by SoMuchMass

To me the definition of "Pay-to-Win" has always been something in an MMO that let you gain an in-game advantage.  In almost all F2P/B2P MMOs you can get some of the best gear in the game with real life money, usually by converting real life money to game currency and buying epics.  For example, I can gear my character in GW2 or Neverwinter in full "epics" with real life money.

I keep hearing players and developers now say that if you can get this gear in game with game currency, it isn't "Pay-to-Win".  When did this become the definition become the norm?

If I can get the best gear in the game with real life money, and I can get it with in-game currency.  It is still "Pay-to-Win".  Because usually you can buy in-game currency with real life money.

Star Citizen and Chris Roberts recently took this approach.  In Star Citizen you can buy all the ships with real life money.  When people said it was "Pay-to-Win", RSI said it isn't "Pay-to-Win" because you can buy the ships in game.

So am I wrong?  What is the definition of "Pay-to-Win"?

Your definition is skewed and not accurate.  P2W has always meant buying power or buying something that is more powerful then can be brought in game. 

Buying items that can be aquired through normal means with the same stats and power is not P2W, it's called Pay For Convenience.

Originally posted by kizan0601

Now no, later yes. They plan on adding 20 man raiding and pvp matches soonish.

 

Then there is the foundry which if you want to get technical can provide everyone unlimited amount of endgame content if done properly.

It's got more endgame then any game (cept maybe Rift) released in the last 5-6 years.  No it doesn't have uber l33t raiding (yet) but the dungeons are plentiful and there is a virtual plethora of loot, weapons and armor sets to aquire, not to mention the enchants for that loot.

If you like small scale group content then NWO is prolly the best game made in the last 5-6 years.  I only wish GW2 would take a page from Cryptic's book on what content is supposed to look like.

Originally posted by poken1151

Originally posted by kjempff
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/384391/THE411-on-NeverWinter-pay2win.html will give you a good idea.

Wow... Just wow.. Yes, it did help, and no idea how I missed that post. It factors in all the gripes I've just been finding out and more. Thanks for the link the read through was very helpful. Mixed with what I'm also figuring... I'll draw my conclusion to it being a lil unfair. I can't craft a bag... but it's 6$ for one... 6? I'd pay a monthly or do B2P to avoid those kinda costs/ To reach where I am in GW2 with Neverwinter would cost me double what GW2 cost me in the first 6 months.

So I must maintain a constant quota of items when I'm out. Limiting this, limits how I can grow profits, time is not strictly equaling money here. Anyway, won't further the dupe thread. Thanks again.

So you'd pay $15 a month for pretty much nothing then spending $6 for a 1 time convenience item? 

It's very much possible to enjoy the game without paying for anything but it will take a bit longer to acquire certain items like Enchantments and the like.  You can also give them $15 a month and you'll get a nice little influx of Zen and help the game out.

As i've stated numerous times, NWO is Pay For Convenience . (P4C)

Originally posted by Gravarg
This game would be perfect if it wasn't for mounts costing $40 or companions costing $35.  I would gladly fork over ~$15-20 for a companion or mount, and I'm sure alot of people are like me.  They'd make more money if they sold things for less...

This is something I whole heartedly agree with, even though I've spent a few $$$ in the Zen store, I would be much more willing to spend more if things were cheaper.

Originally posted by Leiloni

If they had made the game less linear and less instanced it would have been worlds better. An open world game that you can run around in and explore feels much more like a place you can get lost in, but instancing and such a harshly linear design ruins the immersion.  As much as we all hate on WoW, that's one thing they did really right and gaming companies just don't seem to understand how important that is nowadays. But Neverwinter's world is far more closed off and linear than most.

 

Personally I have high expectations for graphics and combat following games like TERA, so those are issues for me as well with Neverwinter. But if they at least made a seamless, open world it could have improved the game experience so much more, allowing us to truly get attached to the game. It certainly has enough lore to make such a world come alive so it really just feels like Cryptic went the quick and cheap route with this game all around. They could have improved upon a number of things besides just world design and leveling experience. But changing that really would have made a large difference I think.

That's what the Foundry is for.  Give those missions a shot, some really nice, detailed, lore rich missions that give the game all the non-linear questing one could hope for.

Originally posted by Axehilt

What's better, logging in to waste 50% of your gaming time traveling, or spending 100% of your time doing the interesting meaningful things?

A game's job is to entertain: to be fun.

When a book wants to entertain it doesn't explain literally every dull day of Frodo's journey to Mordor, it skips between the interesting parts.

When a movie wants to entertain, it doesn't waste time filming literally every single minute of the protagonist's 2-hour-long car trip to New York.  It skips to the interesting part.

Immersion is fun, but doesn't justify wasting the player's time with non-gameplay.  If a game deliberately wastes players' times, players move on to other games that don't waste their time.

Right on right on.