|263 posts found|
Is 'Combat' Limiting Games As A Storytelling Medium?
General Gaming « General Discussion
8/27/14 8:58:25 PM
Originally posted by DimTheDungeonMaster
I agree with most of the thread. Combat is the sole focus of alot of games, even ones that tout story still entirely revolve around combat.
I will disagree with you on WoW, though. While WoW did have some neat lore and story, it had very little to do with WoW's success, IMO. WoW was a raging success for the fluid, immersive combat systems and animations it brought to the genre. I still think WoW has one of the most reactive, fluid combat systems to date, even though I lost interest in that game long, long ago.
GW2 tries so hard to provide a story, but the game's style and engine simply don't provide a suitable medium for any depth ot story.
1.) I think this is the main thing I wanted to hit. The future is believable, reactionary systems. Games need to have believable environments and systems that harmonize and feed off/affect each other. Everything needs to be intertwined and impactful, from one part of the game world to the next. SOE is somewhat attempting this with the StoryBricks/EQNext experiment(I don't think it'll go as well as they hope, but at least they are trying).
Overabundant rains flood the area: Crops fail, cities short on supplies pay more + hire caravans(and players to guard them) come in from other cities on the roads, water monsters move into new territory because of the rising water, bounties arise on said invaders, guards increase, etc.
^ Generic example showing weather, economy, AI reaction/migration, changing borders/territories, new quests(and so on and so forth) all feeding off each other. And, boom, you have a natural storyline of players being required to stop the invasion and supply and save the kingdom.
I think developers finding new and clever ways to create "living worlds" is really the answer to all the problems. Story needs to be part of the world as you guys were saying, not just repeating, pointless NPC quest hubs and such.
Side note: I do think there should be NPC quests and such you get from chatting with NPCs, though I'd rather see it be more like original, old Everquest where you randomly stumble upon them by talking to NPCs, rather than obvious flashing neon signs(read as: more natural).
I think we are still bordering on AI/engine limitations with alot of that stuff, hence, why I said "clever ways" to do things like that.
To end my rambling, combat is definitely overused, and we could certainly see more variety in how your character chooses to "live", be it diplomacy, crafting, cartography, mining, musicians(LOTRO and GW2 already have instruments). But, in the end, I think the problem is moreso how stiff and compartmentalized the worlds are.
Less focus on producing content for the world, more focus on building a world that produces content.
Lol at guilds with microphone Requirement, and log in when you play.
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion
8/27/14 8:05:53 PM
I think part of the problem today is that the literacy level has dropped dramatically since the UO/EQ era, also. People today(in the U.S. at least) seem much less capable of spelling/reading/comprehending basic words.
Alot of people also type fairly slow, so voice chat is a boon for those folks.
As for myself, I have very little interest in (voice)chatting with a bunch of whiny people I've never even met. I do have the luxury of being able to type exceptionally fast, so I never have had a problem with typing out everything.
The only time I really ever will use voice-chat is for PvP. With the fast pace of PvP combat in games today, it's pretty hard to type out anything useful without standing still and getting slaughtered.
I fully understand how valuable it can be in PvP coordination, but I always avoid any guild that "requires" voice chat. I know right away that it's a guild with which I won't fit in. I always look for guilds comprised of people who mostly text-chat, but have no issue with it being used in certain situations to help out the slower folks.
[Column] Guild Wars 2: The Gathering Storm
News & Features Discussion « General Discussion
8/26/14 12:04:12 AM
I think it was worth it for them to try out the Living Story angle. It was a neat experiment in content delivery, unfortunately, it was a miserable failure that they can't seem to let go. I personally think their content updates have all rather sucked, overall.
Honestly, I think the bi-weekly content delivery could actually be a great idea in the hands of another developer on another game, and it'll be interesting to see if anyone tries it again. But, between the poor story/plot delivery system in GW2 to start with, and the type of "end game" it has, the living story just seems like the same old crap with a different skin every new iteration.
In closing: They need to take the saddle off the dead horse and walk on. Their players have been saying for quite a while they'd rather have an expansion, and I think it's about time they focus their efforts in that direction instead of those half-developed LS updates.
Personal disclaimer: I haven't really touched GW2 much in a while, so maybe their last couple updates have been some wonderful, dynamic events, but given history and the responses by other players, I seriously doubt it.
Albion Online: Alpha Begins September 15th
News & Features Discussion « General Discussion
8/25/14 1:26:36 AM
Originally posted by blueturtle13
Well, this is the evolution of crowd-funding and Kickstarter style backing, IMO. I think it's a mutually beneficial system, honestly. The small developers get the funding early on to help with development costs(in turn speeding up development, in theory), and the donors are rewarded with seeing what their money is paying for firsthand.
Frankly, I like this better than Kickstarter projects that may never show any proof of development at all.
Downside, of course, is that there's no safety net like there is for Kickstarter and similarly protected backer sites.
All that said, I'm not generally one of those people willing to pay a developer to let me test their game for them. But, for people simply looking to invest in a project they believe in, being able to access it and personally go along for the journey is a pretty cool reward.
Overall point being: This is a more reliable form of Kickstarter for small developers who may not have a ton of publicity and followers yet. Since the majority of crowd-funded projects through KS, etc. never meet their goal and likely never get a dime.
I do agree, however, that this also very easily opens the door for money-milking schemes from some of the bigger companies.
I loved the first season of SAO anime. The second season was entertaining just for the new game world, but the plot/storyline were so laughably bad, it made me cringe.
Sadly, immersion seems to be a forgotten thing these days.(Personal note: I blame alot of this on so many games using 3rd person perspective now, it's a pet peeve of mine. Can't wait for VR headsets to go mainstream)
The last game I played that had any type of immersion was FF14:ARR, but I think they still don't have individual housing and all of that. The world and environments were fantastically done though. That's a really slow starting game though, you have to do quests to unlock most of the feature systems. But, they now have a 2-week free trial you could try. Some people love it, others hate it. So, it'd be a toss-up.
If you are more interested in the free-building styles, you could always check out Landmark, might be able to get a key from someone with extras.(still in alpha/beta). Not much to the game atm, though, other than building/modelling things.
SHORT VERSION: Unfortunately, I don't have any genuinely great MMO suggestions, because there are so very few "great" MMOs, but I'd check out the 2-week free trial of FF14:A Realm Reborn if you want something to mess around with. It's worth it just to check out the scenery, IMO. The crafting was fairly unique and deep, if that's your thing(you couldn't open a shop or anything though). They are supposed to add individual housing, but it's not in yet, last I knew.
There was one in development a few years back, supposedly, but it ended up just being a silly browser game instead of an actual MMO(I think they just changed directions during development). I played it when they finally had beta/launch or whatever... can't even remember what it's called now.
I remember being disappointed when it actually appeared(was signed up with them hoping for something genuine). They touted it an MMO but it really was hardly that.
TBH, there is a severe shortage of anything that resembles genuine historical periods. There has been a few pirate games along the way(Pirates of the Burning Sea, for instance), but not much beyond that.
Gloria Victis and a few others seem to be tapping the medieval era without the fantasy.
There's been a couple Roman era MMOs, but usually those revolve around mythology or are just very undeveloped/unfinished.
I, personally, always thought it would be a sweet spot to tap into something like the Mayan/Aztecs and things like that, be it historical or mythological or a mix of the two.
You'd think with so many fascinating real cultures around the world, that more people would try to devise games that delve into their history.
Top of my list would be: Star Citizen, EQNext
Keeping a loose eye on a few of the sandboxier types: Gloria Victis, Albion Online, Life is Feudal, etc.
I'm still waiting for a legitimate sandbox game with decent crafting/trades/player-economy where I can run my own shops in the open world(like UO, SWG and them). You'd think such an old and known feature set would appear more often.
I just want to be that guy who owns/runs that weapons shop up on that hill near that place. :p
What kind of graphics style do you enjoy? (poll version 2, more options)
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion
8/09/14 11:56:28 PM
Originally posted by Wizardry
Pretty much the way I feel. The more hand-crafted and detailed, and the less procedurally-redundant, the better it is for me.
As far as specific "styles", I'm not overly picky. I think graphics style should be chosen based on the world/environment/setting the developers are aiming for in their specific game. It's never as simple as making something "look real" or "childish", imo. It's always about matching the style to fit the game, be it lore-considerations, or atmospherics, or mood or whatever.
Simple example. If you were building a space flight + space ship sci-fi game, where people were out exploring the universe and it was meant to be a simulation of a possible future reality setting, then obviously going cartoony instead of largely realistic would just be a rather strange choice to me.
Anyhow, like Wizardry was hitting on, I'm more interested in the "little things" than the overall style choice.
I think FF14:ARR did a great job on details and adding character to their world, for an example, and it left me feeling the devs really cared about their game world.
It was worth the ticket price just to hear you trying to pronounce "copper" in that accent(canadian?) of yours. :D
Place All Beta Key Offers and Requests in Here (Read first post)
General Discussion « Landmark
7/18/14 8:50:24 PM
If anyone currently has any spare keys to give away, I'd appreciate one being sent my way.
Originally posted by ignore_me
I completely agree. I want to see new cities rise(and fall) and the actual world constantly shift. It would be neat to see players migrating from one guild/player city to the next as it became less/more popular, or world events led them to settle into a different area.
So long as they have mechanics to easily clean up the landscape for abandoned houses/cities, open-world housing really is the way to go.
I think there should be certain restricted zones, but I really hope players get the most choice on where to build. I think it's great for players to be able to explore and find a wilderness spot they just love and be able to place their house there, even if that means they inherit the risks of the area.
By risks, I mean, if a player builds their house in a desolate desert area frequented by roaming orc tribes, then perhaps their house can be raided/destroyed since that'd be only natural. This would both make people think twice about setting up buildings all over the map(but still give players the choice), and help clean up the player-refuse.
The ebooks are enjoyable, for the most part. But, I don't recall mention of halflings in any of them, offhand.
They are set in the past, probably before halflings were encountered/discovered/created or whatever. I know the books mentioned a few races such as dwarves, ogres, dark elves, high elves, etc.
The devs haven't mentioned much about races and which will be playable, yet. I suspect we'll see the usual suspects in the EQ universe. Their whole premise for this game is to play what you want to play as far as race/class goes, so I'm sure if they are considering having Ratonga(poll), then Halflings will definitely be there, too.
I'm still waiting for my announcement that I can play Trolls, so keep hoping!
Well, EQ2's house decorating system is a blast, but I hope they don't follow the EQ2 route of instanced housing.
If they do go with instanced housing, I'd much rather see them take the neighborhood instance route than the EQ2 version. I believe LOTRO did the neighborhood route? And, FFXIV is supposed to be doing as well(whenever they release housing).
That said, I much prefer open world housing(SWG/UO). And, with their destructible environments and events systems in EQN, open world housing should be plausible. It's like a built-in house-cleaning mechanic with the switching of a few flags. If a house is abandoned simply make it destructible and re-open the land plot, etc. It seems like open-world housing would be a nice fit in the ever-changing EQN world.
Here's to hoping that the EQN world will be huge and have plenty of space to actually enjoy building houses/cities.
Enchanter in EQ1 was a crazy exciting class to play in dungeon groups. EQ1 did so many things right, even though half of them were accidental. FD pulling, enchanters, amazing buff system, etc.
I do agree that the EQ1 enchanters were a little too powerful though. There needs to be an upper limit on how many targets you could affect at once. Enchanters were so powerful that they could chain stun an entire dungeon while wizards AoE'd them to death, etc. Stuns needed a maximum # of targets, and mez probably should have only been able to be cast on so many targets at a time.
Later on, enchanters and CC became fairly worthless in EQ though. Instead of cleaning up the system with sensible nerfs they just made the entire system irrelevant by giving all mobs immunity to CC.
I would like to see a class like Enchanter again, or something similar that focuses on CC. I think it's a very unique support role that alot of people miss. I'd love to see things like FD pulling make a comeback, too. Pulling, in general, is a dead art much like CC.
Yes, PvP is a different story with CC, and a CC class would need completely different balancing in PvP than in PvE, but I don't think that's an excuse to not have one ever. All classes get balanced differently in PvP than PvE in most games anyhow. Most classes in the last several MMO rehashes have had some type of CC, so it's not really that big of a deal.
Everything today is just a mess with a bunch of players spamming dps/aoe on a blob of enemies with no thinking required. It's a sad state these days.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky
I agree with you guys. I don't think that the amount of magic is the problem, so much as the quality. Magic should be powerful, and hard to use, but not necessarily limited.
The main problem is that magic is no different than anything else in the games. It just has flashier animations.
Take a game like old EQ: Levelling was a bloody nightmare, and levelling up a wizard was even worse. But, when you got that wizard to max level and could finally cast that ice comet, you felt like a master of magic.
I think we need to go back to the old standard, where spells take time to cast(standing still) and you are vulnerable, but when you get those spells off they can do powerful things.
As far as magical items, I couldn't agree more with AlBQ. Magical items need to be more rare and desirable. These things drop like candy and are consumed and used up just as fast.
How to get into the cartoon-style graphics
General Discussion « EverQuest Next
10/10/13 1:10:58 PM
I don't have a major problem with the overall graphics themselves. I really like the environmental/landscape graphics and stuff.
But, there are a few specific things I would really like to see changed with character models.
#1 (and a huge one at that): Change Dark Elves so they don't look like girly anime rejects from the Avatar film. In particular, there's something a little too "cat-like" about the faces of the Dark Elves I've seen presented. The feline features really bother me.
#2: The Kerra lion-man did not impress me very much, I'll admit. I like stylized graphics fine, but less cutesy and cuddly, please. That said, the Kerra is not a big concern to me.
#3: I haven't seen the Trolls and Ogres much yet, but these are pretty important and I'm hoping they come out looking like big, physically imposing monsters. These need to not look all cutesy like the rest of the races I've seen.
My other major concern is the ridiculousness of the movement animations. I'm okay with a little of the parkour stuff, but the videos they've shown to demonstrate it are way too overblown and just stupid looking. I hope these were just to demo the movements and they are going to tone them down.
I'm glad they can do all the cool animations, but just because you can doesn't always mean that you should. It looks straight-up ridiculous leaping and rolling and gliding around everywhere. I can just imagine how quickly that will get old when you see 30 people around you all doing it.
Honestly, just a few minor touch-ups to the models and I think alot more people would be content. Mainly everything just feels too cute and sweet with the models. People, now, seem to equate "stylized" with "cartoony and cutesy", but you really can have stylish graphics and models without them looking like they were designed to attract children. And, right now, a few of the character models are just too childish.
Other than those few gripes, I don't have much trouble getting into the graphics style. I think the most irritating thing to me so far is the parkour stuff. I rather enjoyed the hand-made feel of WoW's graphics, although, I hated their armor styles with a passion... and unfortunately the EQNext armor is apparently going to be a copycat version with giant, oversized pieces.
TL:DR I'm about 85% content with the graphics, and there's nothing I can do to make myself like them more. They honestly just need to take a step back and stop trying to go overboard with everything.
The more I hear about Landmark, the less I feel we are being told.
We continue to hear more and more about this "Landmark" and little to no actual speak of "EQNext" as an MMO(in wake of the overshadowing Landmark launch this winter).
We are learning about and seeing videos of Landmark's features: crafting, resources, building, exploration, combat, creating characters, etc. The more I think about these robust LM features, the less sense it starts to make.
Sure, there are a couple of foreseeable responses to the purpose of LM. Such as using it to separate the building tools and the like in order to filter out the bad-bad player-creations.
But, let's be honest, it makes absolutely no sense to waste time building two separate games.
If we follow the PR speak, it would have us believe that Landmark and (MMO)Next are two separate, yet harmonious entities of some sort. If we cut out all the PR and just compare the base details, however, it seems to me that they are one and the same.
If Landmark were being designed for the specific purpose of PC-content creations, then why would they go to the hassle of building an actual game out of it when they could be spending their time and manpower on the real deal.
So, I'm becoming convinced that "Everquest Landmark" is actually the alpha/beta of "Everquest Next" and they are just using Clever-Speak to hide the fact that it actually is going to evolve into EQNext itself, not live alongside it.
After all, why would there be a need for these land claims and the like if it were just a system being built for building. Why? Because it's actually the EQN world you are exploring and testing out.
We already have heard mention of guilds receiving plots through rewards, etc., in EQNext, and that players will be able to have housing/guild halls of some sort. But, why would you need this land-grab system in LM if it weren't the actual game world?
Allow me to digress a bit:
There are already alot of people arguing in the other threads around here about the plausibility of having everyone's ongoing build-plots in one big open world you can explore.
So, let's theorize that people's build sites may be instanced on the inside. If these build sites are instanced, then it makes even less sense as to why you would need plot claims and all that jazz to build and go all Fantasia in.
And, if the player-creations are inside their own personal instances, that have to be intentionally entered to be seen... the issue of separating player-content from the game world becomes a non-issue.
You go inside your build zone, which is actually an instance accessed through the EQNext world. You build stuff, then submit it for content approval. Approved, transferred to the public game world. Same deal as it would be if LM were separate.
I rather am starting to picture something akin to the Lego Universe setup for building. I doubt many played that, but if you did, then you get the idea. You did your thing in the Lego world, collect bricks from slain enemies, exploration, etc., then you carry them back to your personal build-instance, and you can use them there.
Sound familiar? You go exploring and fighting and gathering resources in "Landmark" and take them back to your personal plot of world-design. Except, for the obvious fact, that there is no such thing as Landmark and you will be doing this in EQNext itself.
I can't believe they'd actually have two segregate groups of players essentially playing the same game.
Maybe, Landmark is the name they'll give to the "Test" server as things progress into the MMO launch. But, either way, it's the exact same game at its core.
TL:DR - Dear Everquest Landmark participants,
You've been playing EQNext the entire time!
It's all just clever wordplay. Hence, the title I gave this thread to show how it's all just one big name cleverly split in two.
In closing: It's like 5 AM and I'm not going to go back and clean this up any time soon, but for those of you who get my point, I'd love to see what the rest of you have been thinking.
I'm 100% behind Grahor's train of thought with EQL. I do not want to spend my time running around harvest/gathering resources in a game that's not even the real MMO that I'm planning to play.
I think it'd be great to get out and explore and go visit other people's plots and creations and have hubs or something to hang out with other people, maybe some areas to do combat to test game mechanics, etc.
That said, I have absolutely no interest in running around harvesting resources to support my building. I'd rather use it like an editor/content creation tool.
I want to log in and build houses/castle/dungeons/waterfalls, or whatever is on the creative flow, at the given time. If I have to first go spend hours farming crap for the side-project game(Landmark), then I am going to lose all interest... and lose it incredibly fast.
Will you be subscribing?
General Discussion « Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
10/07/13 3:16:54 AM
I think the devs have an amazing eye for detail. The way your fishing rod twitches just before the fish strikes the bait, how you can see actual heat haze vapors in the desert, lightning storms, clothes blowing in the wind, etc., are all fantastic little things.
Things like that really make this game feel high quality. And, It's clear that the devs put alot of effort into their work.
The combat was decent and fluid much like WoW. I mostly played archer, so the GCD never bothered me like it did some people(didn't even notice it 90% of the time).
The crafting process was top-notch and probably what I spent the most time doing.
The gathering was dreadfully tedious, boring, and repetitive on the flip-side of crafting.
I enjoyed my few weeks in the game, but I will not be subscribing now.
Quality game, beautiful graphics, but lacking way too many basic quality-of-life features, and there really just isn't enough available yet to warrant paying a fee.
I think it'll be a great game after some more patching. And, I probably would have subbed for a month or two if things like housing and all the 2.1 stuff had been in game at launch. And, man, they badly need to implement the most basic modern MMO features.
Essentially, they should have delayed the launch a couple more months, IMHO. I think it's really going to hurt their retention rates once the free month is officially ended for everyone.
TL:DR: I felt it was worth the $30 box price, but I will not be subscribing.
Like the Fates; hate the mob of mindless zerglings that ruins them all.
The fates themselves are fun with small groups of players who happen to be nearby. Seeing 60 sheeple roll up on every one of them like a swarm of locusts straight out of hell kills fates for me, though.
I liked GW2, but the dynamic event zerg chain was awful. Seeing it as the main form of play in yet another game makes me want to vomit.
Summary: The fates are fine, but they should be nerfed down so people don't just circle around them all day like vultures waiting to pick clean a carcass.
To be fair to the locust-people: I guess there really isn't all that much else to do for levelling other than dungeons... and if you are a DPS it's not really plausible to queue them without a personal group.
Hopefully they'll realize the flaw with the Fates system and patch/nerf some stuff. It would be nice to see actual challenging fights rather than 7 mobs getting mowed down by 10x their number in players.
Does anyone else remember the days when mobs used to actually outnumber players? It's been a while...