All Posts by vajuras

Originally posted by gillvane1

If you replace the grind in an MMORPG, you've just made a new genre of computer game, or instead of an MMORPG you are now making something that already exists, like a First Person Shooter.

 

Either you grind for xp, or like in EVE you grind for money, or perhaps gear, etc.

 

The only thing you can hope for, is to make the grind fun. Without the grind, it's not an MMORPG, but if the grind isn't fun, nobody will play.

 

I liked plain old grinding on mobs, with the occaisional quest thrown in, in old school EQ or DAoC. You find a party, figure out how to work together, then chat while you grind on mobs. You run to town every so often to replace or upgrade gear, sell loot, level up and so forth, then back to the grind.

 

It's fun.

Your post seems to exclude the huge masses that play other games. Roleplaying itself has never been about grinding. I see RPers all the time in Second Life roleplaying out their virtual lives. It's roleplay and much more hardcore then grinding on a mob.

In PnP (aka tabletop), you could always roleplay a character that was autoleveled by the GM. Same with Neverwinter nights, players autolevel their avatars and then hop on the playerrun servers. They are still roleplaying.

Most RPGs of course takes one through a transition from bum to filthy rich hero but that is so cliche'. There are other RPGs where you actually started out uber, then maybe lost your powers, and regained them. Those were also RPGs

So many angles one could look at this and say grinding isn't necessary {to earn the RPG title}. So many games...

What about Guild Wars you can create a max level character you trying to say that's not an RPG? I'm roleplaying- albeit the interaction is limited to PVP but I'm still RPing as a warrior fighting for the honor of my guild and faction

And what about LARPers? They've been around for decades are they not roleplayers as well?

Originally posted by HYPERI0N

Originally posted by mbd1968

Originally posted by -Rodriguez-

Actually thats the best way to get really really rich as a new player. You just need some real RL business skills ;)

Maybe that Business Degree may be of use to me after all 

Thanks for the advice gents...

 

You will also find the remote trading skills usefull as they allow you to trade all over EvE without even having to undock.

yep for the record I dont do that portion of trading which can net the highest payout. What I do is a simplier sort of trade.

Boy if I knew now when I was a newbie I'd woulda had at least 10 million fast.

To start off I would say try to get a player to give you 1 mil. Then try to find goods in another region to buy low then sell high

my trade high has no skills at all and averages a coupla mil a day. That doesnt include my main which works in other markets.

my no-skill trade alt just buys low and sells high somewhere else

imagine what a pro could do that actually understands economics and markets

 edit- but also  try to search those trade forums for guides on how to use your broker skills and marketing

only problem is acquiring the begining capital for trader route. I do quite a bit of trading myself since I tire of everything else fast. I'm not rich tho; just living a simple life hauling goods; buying low; sell high. I guess im rich to a newbie tho since my wallet always well over 100mil. but that is poor compared to the billionaires that are rampant in this title

good luck to you hopefully soon i will be a billionaire too if i stop these massive shopping sprees for ships and stuff

Well to the guy above 1 post or so up single player RPGs evade grinding because they are constantly tossing new content your way. So character progression is actually secondary. The main goal is to complete the storyline (as we see with Bioware rpgs, etc)

MMO space something new would have to be tried out. There's a few worth ideas thats been posted in Developer's Corner. Basically it all boils down to giving players more toys to play with pve-wise

PVP wise MMOs seem to have a lot of longevity and reusable content however they tend to toss in mandatory grinds for gear and XP so don't have a pure pvp MMO to point to. in other genres you see pvpers play pure pvp games for many years tho. I know I played Starcraft forever and war3 / Dota still gets lots of playtime (just examples). Then there was the FPSes like UT. All those games are moddable in some way tho which extends their lifespan for many years

I could point to Guild Wars as good example but it non-subscription based. Grinding wasnt mandatory but purely optional. So I never felt like I grinded ever

Second Life was best idea ever too bad doesnt feel 'gamey' too me and all the sims seem adult oriented (not family friendly)- at least the ones that seem interesting roleplay wise

Originally posted by Gishgeron

Originally posted by vajuras

Back in the day the little guy counted. A guy could have this great idea, and push it out the door and compete (like AC1). UO- raph koster and a friend added the housing in 1 weekend. That right, 1 weekend.

 

These days game developers need "suits" to get their projects out- at least the ones that can really compete with mainstream. "Suits" make calculated risks, unlike a pationate garage developer which will put it all on the line for his dream. Suits don't have dreams beyond making their company profitable

 

There are some studios stepping up like Champions online, APB, WELL Online, Mortal Online, etc. These guys are taking real risks like EVE/CCP did.

But the majority heavy hitters will take safe risks. I still think WAR will be good. Just not off the floor innovative if you follow. Expect more along those lines sadly, safe risks

 

 

I wanted to stop here for a moment and talk about Cryptic a little, before we give a wrong impression.  What Champions online is doing is NOT about taking risks.  They already took those risks with City of Heroes and realized that there was money in it.  Most importantly, they realized what it was that SOLD that game.  Customization, and lots of it.  CoH had some pretty bland gameplay, but tons of character options and tons of skill combinations coupled with even tons MORE skill enhancement combinations.  All that customization overrode the bland gameplay so well that it still has 150K or more players EVEN THOUGH MOST OTHER MMO'S HAVE BETTER GAMEPLAY.

  Basically...what Champions online is attempting to do is deeply expand the customization (which was obviously the selling point, and always will be) while correcting the "bland gameplay" issue.  Most of the gameplay problems lay deeply embed into the shoddy engine they chose to work with.  Granted, I very much LOVE the game and still play.  I think that they really tried to expand that core engine with Champions to allow it to have much better "super hero" gameplay. 

 

 .....

Champions Online is still pretty risky in comparison to the norm. They are abandoning the Class based systems completely in favor of skill-based (HERO PnP system). Recall, they wanted to do that with CoH as well (see old prelaunch e# vids) but then Jack honestly confessed it was just too risky at the time.

Originally posted by Hexxeity

Originally posted by vajuras

Originally posted by Hexxeity

PvE AI can be much more challenging than it is.  But anytime a game comes out with monsters that are too smart, everyone gets all pouty.

They want to be able to level up on easy mobs so they can challenge each other in PvP, it seems.

Really it's just a big pissing contest, whether the PvP players are willing to admit it or not.

Do I care?  Not really.  I'm just saying that the argument that AI < player intelligence is a big load of crap.  Most players are EXTREMELY predictable.

 

Name me one pve mmorpg that has intelligent AI that is smarter then a player. Just 1. Unlike you, I can name an mmorpg that has meaningful PvP where players can 'own' terriority and fight for control (EVE). I would like to know how can the politics and the pvp here is 'predictable'. Please elaborate

As I said, they don't do it because players whine when it happens.  It's not because they can't.

They have (in the distant past) done such things in several games, but players had trouble with the encounters.  Since players have been trained to expect easy, predictable wins in PvE (and because the penalty for failure in some games -- like EQ1 -- is so unpleasant), the encounter gets softened.

If all PvP players really want is a challenge, they need to ask for it.  AI programmers can deliver.  But you also have to promise not to whine when you don't win every time.

Complex AI, too me Hex, involves more then just combat. PvP gives us fear, excitement, and dynamic situations (at least in EVE). Sure, maybe the actual combat can be as you say- predictable due to the Tactical Transparency. But other times it is not.

But regardless, my point is that players should really try to respect other playstyles. I may not like raiding, but I respect raiders for their dedication and rigid organization.

I may not find PVE 'challenging mentally'; but I try to respect the roleplay, achievement, and such it gives

In your original post it was a little demaning to pvp. I should have just let it go because of course you will still feel that way in the future more then likely or perhaps the other posters upset you in which case I cant blame you :(

Look, if you really wanted to play a sandbox game you would play a sandbox. Even if you had to deal with 2d graphics. If you have it in your blood you will seek it out and play something.

You think I wanted to be a spaceship??? Do you honestly think in my dream MMO it would have autoattack, zzzZZZ pve missions, and time based training? You think most of us wanted that?

No, we still gave the game a try and with time adjusted.

World of Darkness will be a skill-based MMO I promise you that. You don't like skill-based remember your thread from 2 days ago? WoD won't be for you either. There will always be some little feature that will bar you from a sandbox. Seriously why not just settle for WAR or AoC if you want to walk around on the ground? Those are good games and they will have tiny, minor sandbox to them

Back in the day the little guy counted. A guy could have this great idea, and push it out the door and compete (like AC1). UO- raph koster and a friend added the housing in 1 weekend. That right, 1 weekend.

These days game developers need "suits" to get their projects out- at least the ones that can really compete with mainstream. "Suits" make calculated risks, unlike a pationate garage developer which will put it all on the line for his dream. Suits don't have dreams beyond making their company profitable

There are some studios stepping up like Champions online, APB, WELL Online, Mortal Online, etc. These guys are taking real risks like EVE/CCP did.

But the majority heavy hitters will take safe risks. I still think WAR will be good. Just not off the floor innovative if you follow. Expect more along those lines sadly, safe risks

Originally posted by Hexxeity

PvE AI can be much more challenging than it is.  But anytime a game comes out with monsters that are too smart, everyone gets all pouty.

They want to be able to level up on easy mobs so they can challenge each other in PvP, it seems.

Really it's just a big pissing contest, whether the PvP players are willing to admit it or not.

Do I care?  Not really.  I'm just saying that the argument that AI < player intelligence is a big load of crap.  Most players are EXTREMELY predictable.

Name me one pve mmorpg that has intelligent AI that is smarter then a player. Just 1. Unlike you, I can name an mmorpg that has meaningful PvP where players can 'own' terriority and fight for control (EVE). I would like to know how can the politics and the pvp here is 'predictable'. Please elaborate

Btw, to amend to my post, the usefulness of PVP is to solve resource contention.

For instance in a PVE game the only way to solve who gets access to the world boss is 'who got first tap'.

In PVP, players can directly resolve themselves who gets access to the world boss by employing force

PvP is also indirect like auction houses (bids) or EVE markets (buy/sell order wars).

PvP / PvE blend is why I play mmorpg. PvP gives me politics and 'dynamic' gameplay. PvE gives me the Lore, roleplay (like role play as a Race like Gallente in EVE to be a freedom fighter or be Amarr ruthless slave trader), and easy, reliable access to money (mobs are static in nature so I know how much I can make per hour).

Even in PVE based titles you have some forms of PVP like in EQ1 vets described how they controlled world bosses and access to gear. That is a form of PVP.

jackwhite try not to get all mad at the other posters here at mmorpg.com there are way more DFO haters then fans

All the DFO fans post on the www.darkfallonline.com forums

Myself, I wish DFO were real and legit but I've sort of lost hope. I just play EVE now and it looks like it will be my only consistent MMO for many years.

You might want to checkout Mortal Online. It's a lot like DFO and the devs appear to have $$$ because acquiring an unreal 3 license isn't cheap

Programmers intentionally build PVE content so it can be defeated. So given enough time, you will eventually win

PvP is different because it is player controlled. So no matter what the developer does- it can get out of hand and someone can always lose even if they are fighting against fair odds

I will play it if it returns

Originally posted by CactusmanX

I have always used the term sandbox differently.

To me any game where you have the ability to not do the linear objectives/story and still be able to play the game is sandbox, like GTA, Spiderman, Hulk, Mercenaries.  Has nothing to do with character progression, if there is any, or your ability to effect the game world.

To that point all MMOGs are sandbox to a degree, they may not offer much to do but you could still always not do quests and kill or make things. Unless it is a game that doesn't have quests in which case that is just an open ended world, which is different from a sandbox.

This is what wiki "used" to have that I agreed with (I'm going from memory):

1) Player should be able to pursue any career present in the game without restriction

2) Player is free to explore any area of the world at anytime

3) If developer goals are present, the player has the freedom to ignore them.

4) Player should be able to impact the game world via the sandbox toys present in the gameplay

Such a definition would still cover GTA, spiderman, etc because no developer defined careers are present anyway. It would cover UO, EVE while casting out games like WoW, Vanguard, etc

Main: EVE

Alt 1: closed beta test

Alt 2: closed beta test

I was subbing to city of heroes as well but think i let that account go inactive

Originally posted by gillvane1

Originally posted by neonaka

Originally posted by kaydinv

Originally posted by gillvane1

Originally posted by kaydinv

To the OP,

I honestly think you're being a little too stubborn about the topic to find the answer you seek. At this point, I would have to say it seems like your OP was a rhetorical question, because you don't seem interested into listening to anybody as much as just argueing with them.

I hate to say it, but you just don't "get it".

 

Hi pot. I'm kettle.

 

I don't understand that expression but, anyway, back to the topic...

You've done a great job of confusing yourself as well as pretty much everyone in this thread. I'm going to attempt to make sense of all of this.

There's basically two major arguements being thrown around here. One is skill-based vs level-based in a sandbox game and the other is skill-based vs class-based system in a sandbox game. I honestly am not quite sure which point you're trying to make but, maybe this will square things out: An ideal sandbox game gives the user freedom in every aspect of the game. That means that a class-based system cannot work in a sandbox game because, the classes dictate your character progression. A level-based system still works in a sandbox game by all means. Level-based and class-based systems are not one in the same, it is just more common to see these two put together than a skill-based system with classes.

Are we good?

 

This is correct.

Classes = No sandbox - because action is dictated and roles are forced.

Level Base  = Sandbox lite - usually not used because it causes restrictions.

Skill Base - Sandbox - Only limited by the time it takes to learn a skill - sending you down your "chosen path". True sandbox design.

 

Only true sandbox MMO in existence that I know of is EvE Online.

 

Could they make a game like EVE, but where you play a person, and NOT a spaceship? I might give that a try. However, I don't like the EVE system of progression, where you progress even if you are not playing the game. In that case, here's a years worth of monthly fees, give me a years worth of progression. That's kinda bleh.

And EVE isn't perfect, because there's a grind for money to buy spaceships. You either grind for xp, or you grind for money in these games, so I don't really mind grinding for xp.

<vajuras tries to put on unbiased fanboi hat>

Soon we will get Ambulation patch which should help aid the RP. you will be able to get out and walk around stations

The time based advancement I'm not terribly fond of but its cool to take a break from EVE and come back and your character has improved I admit. So you always have a goal

Technically you dont have to grind for money. I know it sounds that way but there are so many ways to make money I will attempt to list a few:

1) Trade. I do a simple sort of trade I'm not big scale yet. So I go to a market, grab things that sell much higher in another region. Then I haul the goods to that market. I'm AFK the whole time (autopilot). Takes bout 5 mins of actual playtime to generate some ISK

2) professional traders actaully play the market some claim to make Billions in a week

3) Exploration can net big rewards if you get lucky

4) Be a CEO and charge corp taxes and make ISK from that. then tell the members you really are spending it on maintenance

5) 'grow' a character then trade for ISK (some do this)

6) use real money to buy ISK (I did this once or twice its allowed if you do it on forums).

7) many other ways I'm too lazy to list.

Technically the only grind is the passive time based grind

Originally posted by Kyerna

Originally posted by vajuras

Originally posted by lupisenparis

no but i have played

AC1

Planetside (fps-persistent world)

EQ1

bf 2142 (fps)

 

 

However you are entitled to your opinion. Let's say you are correct but there are no examples of games where I can create my own skill? So you would have to elaborate on your concept. Hopefully one day you will. Or you could keep it to yourself and maybe one day publish it of course

Vajuras, you should look up on Ryzom; it's the only game I know of that let's players customize almost every skill action, even create them from scratch by using building blocks. (power vs credits)

Ah yes that's true via the Stanza system they called it right? I'll play it when it comes back thanks

WAR actually has my interest only because the Classes all look unique. They dont feel like they've been ripped from D&D directly but rather they at least made some changes

Well I'm not sure how i will feel months from now but right now I have a lot of positive feelings for the game. At very least I have respect for features they trying to do

Originally posted by lupisenparis

oh and another mentionable game was warcraft II battle.net on player made/hosted pvp fights

Bro you played AC1 so that makes you a vet in any case.  So if you say builds suck then its coming from a credible source. I'm willing to let that go because you speaking from point of view of an AC1 player

Originally posted by lupisenparis

no but i have played

AC1

Planetside (fps-persistent world)

EQ1

bf 2142 (fps)

 

That's a nice list but play GW if you get a chance. It's based on decks sort to speak. There is a word for this sort of game but the term evades me atm. Has a lot in common with card games

However you are entitled to your opinion. Let's say you are correct but there are no examples of games where I can create my own skill? So you would have to elaborate on your concept. Hopefully one day you will. Or you could keep it to yourself and maybe one day publish it of course