• Create Account

MMO Worldbuilding

Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

60 replies to this topic

#21Caldenfor  Members   -  Reputation: 323

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 26 April 2011 - 04:38 PM

My current concept for a world. I will provide explanations as to why I decided upon certain aspects of the world when requested, but I would like to keep this as brief as possible for the time being(at work, shh):

World: Chern
Setting: Fantasy
Earth influences on game world: Olmec, India(n), Japanese, Norse, Gaelic, Greek, German, Catholic, Christian. These aren't direct Earth to Chern influences, just the type of cultures that can be seen in the world.

The world of Chern is a place for second chances. In the history of the universe there have been countless times where creatures have been forced to the brink of annihilation. On occasion the Gods have taken it upon themselves to intervene on behalf of these creatures, not always to the benefit of the creatures. Taken away from certain death these creatures found themselves on Chern. Though they may have been relieved of their original fate they must forge a new one on Chern amongst the amalgamation of those that have been saved, those that have been cursed, and those that live unaware of the conflict that surrounds them.

Gameplay:

You select your domain and then choose from one of five available races per domain. You enter the world as a "cursed" being that your domain has elevated above mere mortals. Cursed may be the term used, but there are those that would believe that such an existence should be considered to be a blessing, not a curse. You are alive, you are mortal, yet you cannot be sent to the afterlife upon death, you merely return to Chern to continue living until the curse is lifted.

The first task one must take upon finding out they are cursed is to train as one of thirteen different classes(13 per Domain). You cannot change your class once selected without remaking your character. Your character will have start as level 1 and the maximum level is 50. Experience towards these levels can be gained through PVE, PVP(Domain vs Domain), or crafting. Yes, you can level purely through crafting! It most likely won't be the fastest way, or the most profitable, but it will be a possibility. Along with character levels there will be skill levels. Character levels are more of a way to provide for attribute acquisition and limiting the maximum skill levels available based on character level. Skill levels are only gained through using skills/abilities that are linked to the skill line. You may be a great Carpenter, but that doesn't mean you are a great fighter, you have to train in the arts of combat to become a great fighter.

NPC villages/cities will be limited. It is up to the players to earn the right to establish towns. Once enough players own homes, if in close proximity, they can agree to form a town. Once this town is established the players must develop the town and protect it or it could fall to ruin. NPC raiders, eventually even NPC armies, will be able to attack the towns. Personal houses can't be destroyed by NPCs, but town buildings can be. The towns themselves are more than just a place for people to setup shops, own homes and the like. The more prosperous the towns are the greater benefit they provide to your domain. The larger the towns the more NPCs are made available to become guards to defend keeps, the greater quality of manufacturing the better equipped the guards can be, and the larger the target the town becomes bringing in much more dangerous NPC foes that drop much more lucrative materials.

PVE Player cities
Domain vs Domain combat; includes keep sieges and open field combat alike
Lower power curve than typical MMORPGs to provide a more balanced, enjoyable experience
Crafting is the primary way to acquire gear., gear breaks down through use
Domain Ranks
Taming; includes tamable mounts

Ran out of time... sorry I didn't get it all in there. Ask any questions and post any thoughts. Thanks.

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 27 April 2011 - 10:12 AM

The first task one must take upon finding out they are cursed is to train as one of thirteen different classes(13 per Domain). You cannot change your class once selected without remaking your character..

Why disallow people from changing?
For a very reasonable fee I am available as a freelance design consultant, editor, or ghostwriter. PM me if interested.

I have a general interest in 1. games involving pet breeding or farming, and 2. interactive story romance. If you'd like to discuss one of these you may PM me.

#23Caldenfor  Members   -  Reputation: 323

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 27 April 2011 - 12:24 PM

<br />The first task one must take upon finding out they are cursed is to train as one of thirteen different classes(13 per Domain). You cannot change your class once selected without remaking your character..

Why disallow people from changing?

I want to try and make the game as fair for everyone involved as possible as it is a competitive atmosphere. If people can bypass challenges by playing the "easier" class, then switching to the "harder" class, it takes away from those that worked through the challenges as the hard class to begin with. The only way I could see allowing class changes would be if everything about the character aside from their belongings was reset. Character level, Domain rank, attributes, skills, reputation, all back to fresh start status. If you gain Domain rank 8 by playing a Rajput(heavy melee) and then you switch over to a Sage(caster) and maintain that Domain rank 8, you didn't really earn it as a Sage, thus fudging the experience and taking away from the efforts of those that earned Domain rank 8 as a Sage.

There will be multiple character slots available per server per account and leveling doesn't take an extremely excessive amount of time like other games are prone to do. I don't want people to fear starting a new character. They can group with maxed out characters from level 1 on and still gain experience. I don't want one character to be able to have every experience possible in the game, but I don't want to have that same limit for the player's themselves.

#24Caldenfor  Members   -  Reputation: 323

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 28 April 2011 - 07:42 AM

The first task one must take upon finding out they are cursed is to train as one of thirteen different classes(13 per Domain). You cannot change your class once selected without remaking your character..

Why disallow people from changing?

Any opinions on the world itself? I have taken a stab at writing a sci-fi novel, then I realized while I have it all laid out and it sounds great, I don't feel that I can write at that level which gives me doubts to my overall writing/creative capacity.

A few of the class names by domain...

Eagle Warrior
Knight
Bard
Bloodletter
Cleric

Waylayer
Samurai
Kannushi
Shramana
Sage

Berserker
Sicarii
Friar
Hoplite
Theurgist

The first Domain has Mesoamerican/Christian/Gaelic influence.
The second has India/Japan/German influence.
The third has Norse/Christian/Greek influence.

All of the influences aren't strictly linked to earth history, but that is where some is inspired from. Each domain will have a human race select available, which is part of the influence. Most on Chern shun technology as they feel that it leads to offending the gods, and on occasion, the gods have proven that feeling to be valid.

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 28 April 2011 - 06:55 PM

Any opinions on the world itself? I have taken a stab at writing a sci-fi novel, then I realized while I have it all laid out and it sounds great, I don't feel that I can write at that level which gives me doubts to my overall writing/creative capacity.

Well, I'm not personally a fan of seeing historical cultures or religious influences appear in futuristic settings. I kind of like the idea of an experimentally-minded deity who rescues failing species (or whatever) to give them a second chance or perhaps remix them into something more functional; I'm usually not a fan of seeing gods appear at all in game stories, but my interest in seeing humans placed inside experiments outweighs that. There doesn't seem to be a lot of other information about the world here, I'd classify the rest under gameplay mechanics. Of those I'm interested in tame-able mounts, but disinterested by the idea of player-created towns (because I'm a lone wolf who dislikes too much socialization in my gameplay, as I was talking about a few posts ago). I think the idea of some classes being harder than others is conceptually interesting but I'm not sure I actually like it. And I have an overall preference where I can experience most of the game with a single character, it breaks my mental immersion to switch between characters, especially more than 2. Usually I end up regarding one character as 'me' and the others as mules with little personality or story.

I end up not commenting on a lot of the story and world ideas posted in this forum, usually because I'm not part of their target audience or don't like the whole subgenre, not because I have any complaint about the particular idea. It's just very difficult for me to think of something helpful and positive to say about a game concept that isn't the kind of thing I'd ever be interested in playing, though I'm sure there are other people out there who would be interested.
For a very reasonable fee I am available as a freelance design consultant, editor, or ghostwriter. PM me if interested.

I have a general interest in 1. games involving pet breeding or farming, and 2. interactive story romance. If you'd like to discuss one of these you may PM me.

#26SabataS  Members   -  Reputation: 138

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 28 April 2011 - 08:30 PM

I'll return to our topic sometime again sunandshadow, certainly been interesting to discuss the systems and ideas, dont want to publicly post all the rest of them just now so maybe we can discuss them in private sometime later.

Still on topic I am interested to share ideas on how you would work on taking away the fast "get boring" factor from a crafting oriented game that has no combat, I am thinking that one good way would be an entertaining storyline behind the world and NPC players.

At some point I even imagined creating something like monthly mangas/comics revolving around NPC characters, again more on this maybe in private.

The other obvious try is to make the whole crafting game so interesting and addicting that people would never or just take a long time to get bored. Not a simple task...

In game world puzzles, tricky requirements to explore a land? As we discussed before, good or bad I wonder. In any case if you have idea you'd like to share be my guest.

Caldenfor@ I am no expert in that direction that you are going to but do you really need all those classes? Sometimes its better to keep short and expand later, plus I believe it'll be so much harder to come up with different skill trees for each one of them.

Also I believe adding a political, or religious views to a game is a bad idea due to "political and religious racism" however there are many games that are exceptions to this rule. Just make sure not to give one or other "more power"
Towns Life Project - Celebrating 3rd Year of Development on 27th June - Towns Life

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 28 April 2011 - 09:14 PM

SabataS, if your goal is for the game to be non-violent, why not substitute for combat with non-violent versions of similar gameplay? Racing, sim gameplay, card or board games, and other minigames? Neopets is an interesting example - it has a large pool of minigames, most of which are non-violent. Players 'earn their daily gold' by playing these minigames up to three times per day per game. Puzzle Pirates is another example - most of their minigames are non-violent too, and players can either due them for pay for the NPC navy, or do them to give an advantage to the player ship they are crewing for. Now, for an MMO it's preferable to incorporate the games into the world more. Fishing is a really obvious example, because many RPGs incorporate a fishing minigame, but most of them are terrible games, such as the one in WoW and the one in Harvest Moon; the secret is to make each game something complex enough to require thought, and something players would enjoy on it's own and play even if there was no reward.

Of course, it's a lot of designwork and effort to create a dozen really good minigames. This kind of thing is more appropriate to add to an MMO after you have a working alpha version.

I personally like in-game-world puzzles which must be solved to unlock things. Ideally, these should have some randomization to them so they will not be something where people just go to the game's wiki and read the answers.
For a very reasonable fee I am available as a freelance design consultant, editor, or ghostwriter. PM me if interested.

I have a general interest in 1. games involving pet breeding or farming, and 2. interactive story romance. If you'd like to discuss one of these you may PM me.

#28Caldenfor  Members   -  Reputation: 323

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 28 April 2011 - 10:46 PM

Any opinions on the world itself? I have taken a stab at writing a sci-fi novel, then I realized while I have it all laid out and it sounds great, I don't feel that I can write at that level which gives me doubts to my overall writing/creative capacity.

Well, I'm not personally a fan of seeing historical cultures or religious influences appear in futuristic settings. I kind of like the idea of an experimentally-minded deity who rescues failing species (or whatever) to give them a second chance or perhaps remix them into something more functional; I'm usually not a fan of seeing gods appear at all in game stories, but my interest in seeing humans placed inside experiments outweighs that. There doesn't seem to be a lot of other information about the world here, I'd classify the rest under gameplay mechanics. Of those I'm interested in tame-able mounts, but disinterested by the idea of player-created towns (because I'm a lone wolf who dislikes too much socialization in my gameplay, as I was talking about a few posts ago). I think the idea of some classes being harder than others is conceptually interesting but I'm not sure I actually like it. And I have an overall preference where I can experience most of the game with a single character, it breaks my mental immersion to switch between characters, especially more than 2. Usually I end up regarding one character as 'me' and the others as mules with little personality or story.

I end up not commenting on a lot of the story and world ideas posted in this forum, usually because I'm not part of their target audience or don't like the whole subgenre, not because I have any complaint about the particular idea. It's just very difficult for me to think of something helpful and positive to say about a game concept that isn't the kind of thing I'd ever be interested in playing, though I'm sure there are other people out there who would be interested.

Preface: My apologies. This post started out as two paragraphs and then... one thing led to another. I won't be offended if you don't want to read it, but I was trying to provide more of a grasp as to what to expect from the world. Summary = Not futuristic, no earth religions, player cities will be the PVE hubs to replace stagnant NPC villages/towns/cities, related thoughts.

I am sorry if it came across as a futuristic endeavor, it isn't that at all. It would most likely be considered medieval, but I don't want there just to be European Medieval influence and be done with it. I want to include a few other of the available historical design influences to give the Domains different feels. If they all play and look the same, no fun in that. Catholic/Christian influences were only mentioned as that is where the terminology and the overall basis for a few of the classes are, i.e. Paladin, Cleric, Priest, Friar. The two religions won't exist in the game. Some of the belief systems for cultures in the game will certainly have some religious inspiration, but I do not want any modern religious conflicts to be able to cause trouble amongst the players. Religion is a part of history and a great big chunk of society, so how can it be ignored for inspiration?

One of the technologies that the Gods smothered out was the creation of black powder. It was going to be used by a Domain to gain supremacy over the other Domains... guess the Gods like a fair competition too?

Player cities are not required for play, but they will be the "hubs" of the PVE world. They would also be one of the "end game" PVE activities as the cities would be attacked by stronger forces the larger the city became. I am hoping this helps take care of static NPC villages/cities getting stagnant and boring. There is even potential for world events to be established, with hints of the event to come, to bring players together in large PVE battles to defend the cities. I felt that it would bring something to the game for the PVE side of the game as it would give non-PVP players, and PVP players alike, something to participate in on a larger scale. Cities would provide places for players to establish shops, craft goods, trade wares, get together, and generally just live out of it.

The current inception of player cities would have it that a certain number of personal properties are required to be within a certain radius to initiate the process. It could be comparable to starting a guild, the person initiating the process would have to belong to a guild, with a minimum amount of people that must agree to form the city or it won't form. The individual wouldn't control the city, the guild they are in would, and there would be settings within the guild settings hierarchy privileges to determine which ranks within the guild would be able to perform certain functions, up to the Guild Master/Officers to set restrictions. The guild that runs the player city would then be able to plan the layout of the city, follow up with developing it, and protecting it. Non-guild members could certainly be of assistance as the cities once established would then provide bonuses to the Domain by increasing the capabilities of the Domain(NPCs) to defend the Domain from their enemies, which assists players in Domain vs Domain conflict that involves NPCs(Guard Patrols/Keep Fights/Etc). Creating a player city is going to be easy, but developing a successful and long lasting city will not be. Just because a guild may earn the privilege to start a city within the Domain does not mean they will be able to do it well as I hope for it to be a challenge to the players, not just a side show that takes no effort. Only player city buildings can be destroyed by PVE, not personal houses.

The main issue I see with this process of guild operated player cities would be that if a player has a problem with a guild they may enter the city intent on causing trouble. Giving the players the capability of policing their own city is very tempting, but I haven't been able to figure out a way to make it work without bringing up other issues. Being able to "evict" a property owner that has placed in an effort to impede the city's development could be very useful. I think that the eviction would have to be handled in a way that the player being evicted wouldn't actually lose anything in the process, their home or the possessions inside. Perhaps a more appropriate system would require that the guild's city planner must establish a plot and give permission to the homeowner to start building their house within the city limits. Houses placed before the city was formed could be grandfathered and it would be up to the guild to work with the individual on a solution to the problem, if one exists. Another system that could be employed would be to be able to banish people from the city. This would certainly have to be tested and fleshed out.

Another issue I will hear of is that people don't want player housing/cities to congest the landscape and block content. That isn't intended at all and I hope to have prohibited areas established to prevent housing from going in specific areas as well as making ownership less trivial/easy. There will be a one house per account restriction to help limit the number of homes available to be placed. Homes that are not maintained will fall down. It will take a while, but if you don't do any home repairs it will eventually collapse and your possessions will fall on the ground! Just hire a carpenter/architect to come by and do the work if you can't do it yourself. There would also need to be a system setup to collapse homes that aren't visited at all by their owners/co-owners. It would be in addition to the housing repairs so you not only have to actively visit/use your home you have to keep it repaired. I decided against employing a "tax/rent" system to avoid having cash sinks. If there is a problem with inflation it may be altered in the future. The landscape of the game will also be designed to be larger than your typical MMORPGs as travel will be above average in speed, every character can sprint!, to provide more room for tactical strategies in Domain vs Domain combat along with and more room for housing so it doesn't invade upon PVE content too much.

Raiding as in WoW/Rift/etc won't exist. Dungeons are to be kept persistent(separated by zone line from the seamless world) and shared by all those that enter it, no group instances/raid instances as that is not something that fits into the overall concept. Shared dungeons give lone wolves more of a chance to experience dungeons? There will certainly be challenging encounters around the world, but they will be shared content for the entire server, not for a handful of select individuals. In the area where all three domains connect in the PVP landscape I intend to provide some neutral things, PVE and PVP, for the different Domains to all fight for. Always had an idea for a Giant's castle with different corridors(slaves/servants) and tunnels(vermin/home invaders) for the players to travel and fight within. They couldn't use steps intended for a giant so they would have to travel via these methods where they would encounter those that share the same pathways.

It would be most easily comparable to a non-subterranean Darkness Falls(DAoC RVR/PVE dungeon) with Legion(end boss) being replaced by a Giant that is pissed off at you for invading his castle. When the Giant is defeated in an epic battle there is potential for him having been in possession of an object of power where the survivors of their masters demise would erect a fortification inside the Giant's castle around the object that would later be able to be conquered by players to give that bonus to the controlling Domain, thus a target of interest for all domains to fight over is formed. Or, you could just have the Giant respawn and allow others on the server to attempt the epic encounter as well. If the first, I did intend on having Giants come to the castle upon hearing of the previous owners demise, I mean, what Giant isn't looking for an already built castle to live in? This would have the same result as having a Giant respawn just delayed and providing the object of power fort encounter to exist during the Giant's exile.

Sorry for the rambling. I get caught up in thoughts at this time of day.

#29Caldenfor  Members   -  Reputation: 323

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 28 April 2011 - 11:15 PM

Caldenfor@ I am no expert in that direction that you are going to but do you really need all those classes? Sometimes its better to keep short and expand later, plus I believe it'll be so much harder to come up with different skill trees for each one of them.

It may seem like a lot, but it isn't going to be as in depth as having 39 completely different classes. It would be similar to how Dark Age of Camelot had their classes setup. Each Domain will have access to the same capabilities, but they will be split differently amongst the classes for each Domain. I have each realm having an Archer, Assassin, Tank, Melee DPS, Melee Hybrid, Healer, Healer Hybrid, Caster Hybrid, Caster, Caster Summoner, and Tamer. The Hybrid addition means that there will be a Melee, Healer, Caster, and two Support subroles attached to these classes. One Domain has a Melee/Support, Healer/Melee, Caster/Healer, Caster Summoner/Support, and a Tamer/Caster. The next would have a Melee/Caster, Healer/Support, Caster/Support, Caster Summoner/Healer, and a Tamer/Melee. The third would have Melee/Healer, Healer/Caster, Caster/Support, Caster Summoner/Support and a Tamer/Melee. I had to keep the secondary role of Support and Healer away from the Tamer classes for hopefully obvious reasons. I feel that Tamers could easily get out of balance if they are handed extra healing and support capabilities. They will have their own personalities, but for the sake of balancing them the major difference would be how they would work with their pet(s) to do damage.

I hope this makes sense. Each Domain would have access to almost all of the same ability capabilities, just expressed differently and arranged differently depending on the Domain and the Class. Class unique abilities will exist, just not a complete set of unique abilities for each of the 39 different classes.

#30 RedPin   Banned   -  Reputation: 36

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 29 April 2011 - 12:59 AM

I think you might be interested in reading what people actually want on mmorpg.com. After reading about 20 threads of the same "historians" and "new kids" arguing back and forth the formation of a want list was created based on the reasonable aspects of their ideas and arguments. I'll go over some of the wants and desires of both sides. Amazingly, any indie team can deliver these aspects into a mmog.

1. Players simply want as many optional mini games as possible, and they require a reward or some in game changing events for winning and losing.
2. Destroy the healer class along with every other class and make every skill available in some kind of combination process and skill support system with the exception of skills based on certain items the player needs equipped.
3. Allow the player to build their character, city, guild, raid, mount, pet, and items their own way with as much control given to them as possible.
4. Players want stability, top notch connections, and also availability of the mmog.
5. Players are willing to pay for subscriptions or cash shop items that don't ruin the balance of the game, and yes most of the people posting for this were cheap skate idiots looking for a lot for no cost to them at all.

I actually have around 25 reasonable additions any "developer" can add totheir mmog list, but "6. The mmog should be complete and without bugs" is a big pet peeve that makes games or breaks games this age.

Hope that helps, and yes no matter how much a idea may sound good, may smell good, may seem to sell good, you need to be able to hear the cries of the people before you go into a epic stun lock of ideas. Down right to the formula, games are meant to make money by immersion alongside fun.
Failure is simply denying the truth and refusing to adapt for success. Failure is synthetic, invented by man to justify his laziness and lack of moral conduct. What truely lies within failure is neither primative or genetic. What failure is at the heart, is man's inability to rise and meet the challenge. Success is natural, only happening when man stops trying to imitate a synthetic or imaginable object. Once man starts acting outside his emotional standpoints, he will stop trying to imitate synthetic or imaginable objects called forth by the replication of his emptiness inside his mind. Man's mind is forever idle and therefore shall call forth through the primitives of such subconscious thoughts and behaviors that Success is unnatural and that failure is natural. Success is simply doing something at man's full natural abilities and power, failure is the inability to act on what man wants, dreams, wishes, invisions, or thinks himself to do. ~ RED (concluded when I was 5 years old looking at the world with wide eyes)

#31Caldenfor  Members   -  Reputation: 323

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 29 April 2011 - 07:34 AM

I think you might be interested in reading what people actually want on mmorpg.com. After reading about 20 threads of the same "historians" and "new kids" arguing back and forth the formation of a want list was created based on the reasonable aspects of their ideas and arguments. I'll go over some of the wants and desires of both sides. Amazingly, any indie team can deliver these aspects into a mmog.

1. Players simply want as many optional mini games as possible, and they require a reward or some in game changing events for winning and losing.
2. Destroy the healer class along with every other class and make every skill available in some kind of combination process and skill support system with the exception of skills based on certain items the player needs equipped.
3. Allow the player to build their character, city, guild, raid, mount, pet, and items their own way with as much control given to them as possible.
4. Players want stability, top notch connections, and also availability of the mmog.
5. Players are willing to pay for subscriptions or cash shop items that don't ruin the balance of the game, and yes most of the people posting for this were cheap skate idiots looking for a lot for no cost to them at all.

I actually have around 25 reasonable additions any "developer" can add totheir mmog list, but "6. The mmog should be complete and without bugs" is a big pet peeve that makes games or breaks games this age.

Hope that helps, and yes no matter how much a idea may sound good, may smell good, may seem to sell good, you need to be able to hear the cries of the people before you go into a epic stun lock of ideas. Down right to the formula, games are meant to make money by immersion alongside fun.

Players don't always know what they want, nor get what they want, as it may not fit into all games. I am trying to be as broad as possible with the design without taking away from the concept. When I was younger I used to want to design MY game, but over the years I have realized what I want isn't what everyone else wants. What I am trying to design is a game that is Domain vs Domain oriented where you have more invested in a game than just your character. I want collaborated efforts by players to be rewarding for the Domain rather than just rewarding the individuals.

1. If you can think of some mini-games that would fit into the concept without taking away from the game I am always open to ideas on bettering the game. I plan for their to be collectibles like Ultima Online, which on it's own is a form of mini-game. When I say collectibles I am not talking about saving things in your digital binder for self pleasure, I mean ones that you can buy, sell, stash away, or proudly display.

2. Not going to happen. There will be skills that determine the overall capabilities of the combatant, but they are restricted on a per class basis. This is for balancing mainly, but also to have characters have some individualism to them. Less of the FOTM, more of the, "I play it and I enjoy it". The power curve of the game is less than your traditional MMORPG. Level 50 in this concept would be like playing as a level 35 in DAoC with both starting at the same level 1. They just gain power more slowly. I find that games that concentrate on making characters too powerful take away from the enjoyment of combat. How many people would run around different level BGs in games just to enjoy the "non-end game PVP" purely because it was more balanced?

3. Player cities will be customizable with provided structures. They can choose the layout, but there will be a max radius(square most likely) available to build in to avoid Great Walls being built every where. Outside of homes will have slight customization options, while entering a home would be in a separate zone(instance) for the player to customize as well. I would love to avoid all instances, but I don't think it would be technologically possible to have homes like Ultima Online did without bogging down those around the home. I am trying to include taming in the game without making it too powerful, but also enjoyable. Potential for pet customization would be in finding various visuals, some more rare than others, while being able to help train your pet. There is a possibility for raising pets from egg form.

4. Graphics are going to be good, but "next-gen" is out of the question unless it provides for many people battling simultaneously. I don't think it will be too hard to imagine 200+ players getting together for fights. If all goes well it could even rear up to 600+ in a close proximity(same zone). Quality of play comes before graphics to an extent.

5. I don't really see room for a cash shop, but a subscription would be a certainty if it all works out.

Gotta run.

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 29 April 2011 - 02:40 PM

I am sorry if it came across as a futuristic endeavor, it isn't that at all. It would most likely be considered medieval, but I don't want there just to be European Medieval influence and be done with it. I want to include a few other of the available historical design influences to give the Domains different feels. If they all play and look the same, no fun in that. Catholic/Christian influences were only mentioned as that is where the terminology and the overall basis for a few of the classes are, i.e. Paladin, Cleric, Priest, Friar. The two religions won't exist in the game. Some of the belief systems for cultures in the game will certainly have some religious inspiration, but I do not want any modern religious conflicts to be able to cause trouble amongst the players. Religion is a part of history and a great big chunk of society, so how can it be ignored for inspiration?

Oh, that was my mistake, I was thinking from the first post that you were talking about a fantasy game, but then I read your statement mentioning a science fiction novel, and I thought you meant you were saying the game's story was the science fiction novel, so I was trying to figure out where the science fiction part was, and I decided the setting must be futuristic, lol.

I'm confused how you can have a religious class without the corresponding religion existing in the game - don't you need to have some class-specific exposition explaining how they get their powers from god, or something like that?

Your last sentence there was probably rhetorical, but actually as an atheist I don't have any problem designing religion-free fantasy or science fiction settings. On the other hand I think religion is interesting in the abstract, it can be fun to design fantasy cults and things, and they can be thematically powerful 'characters' in one's fiction... that's getting quite off-topic though.

Shared dungeons give lone wolves more of a chance to experience dungeons?

Doesn't count unless the lone wolf can kill the boss themselves. Actually lone wolves are tremendously benefited by instanced dungeons which can be scaled in difficulty to match the number of players entering.

What I am trying to design is a game that is Domain vs Domain oriented where you have more invested in a game than just your character. I want collaborated efforts by players to be rewarding for the Domain rather than just rewarding the individuals.

For me, that's the core problem - I just don't want to play that kind of game. I'm actually astonished how closely the mmorpg.com list describes the kind of game I want to play - I've been anti-classes for a long time but I would have thought most people would disagree because I never see people proposing classless MMOs here on gamedev. Although I'd quibble over point 3 - my own mmo design would not have player-created guilds or cities; unsure about raiding. And I'd add an important point about how the game must be an interactive fiction experience.

1. If you can think of some mini-games that would fit into the concept without taking away from the game I am always open to ideas on bettering the game. I plan for their to be collectibles like Ultima Online, which on it's own is a form of mini-game. When I say collectibles I am not talking about saving things in your digital binder for self pleasure, I mean ones that you can buy, sell, stash away, or proudly display.

You could either give each domain a 10% bonus on the minigame scores of its members, or you could require a certain amount of minigame play per week or other time increment as 'maintenance'.
For a very reasonable fee I am available as a freelance design consultant, editor, or ghostwriter. PM me if interested.

I have a general interest in 1. games involving pet breeding or farming, and 2. interactive story romance. If you'd like to discuss one of these you may PM me.

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 29 April 2011 - 02:41 PM

I think you might be interested in reading what people actually want on mmorpg.com. After reading about 20 threads of the same "historians" and "new kids" arguing back and forth the formation of a want list was created based on the reasonable aspects of their ideas and arguments. I'll go over some of the wants and desires of both sides. Amazingly, any indie team can deliver these aspects into a mmog.

1. Players simply want as many optional mini games as possible, and they require a reward or some in game changing events for winning and losing.
2. Destroy the healer class along with every other class and make every skill available in some kind of combination process and skill support system with the exception of skills based on certain items the player needs equipped.
3. Allow the player to build their character, city, guild, raid, mount, pet, and items their own way with as much control given to them as possible.
4. Players want stability, top notch connections, and also availability of the mmog.
5. Players are willing to pay for subscriptions or cash shop items that don't ruin the balance of the game, and yes most of the people posting for this were cheap skate idiots looking for a lot for no cost to them at all.

I actually have around 25 reasonable additions any "developer" can add to their mmog list, but "6. The mmog should be complete and without bugs" is a big pet peeve that makes games or breaks games this age.

Hope that helps, and yes no matter how much a idea may sound good, may smell good, may seem to sell good, you need to be able to hear the cries of the people before you go into a epic stun lock of ideas. Down right to the formula, games are meant to make money by immersion alongside fun.

I like this list so far, I'd love to see the full list if you're willing to post it or pm it or something.
For a very reasonable fee I am available as a freelance design consultant, editor, or ghostwriter. PM me if interested.

I have a general interest in 1. games involving pet breeding or farming, and 2. interactive story romance. If you'd like to discuss one of these you may PM me.

#34Caldenfor  Members   -  Reputation: 323

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 29 April 2011 - 04:36 PM

I am sorry if it came across as a futuristic endeavor, it isn't that at all. It would most likely be considered medieval, but I don't want there just to be European Medieval influence and be done with it. I want to include a few other of the available historical design influences to give the Domains different feels. If they all play and look the same, no fun in that. Catholic/Christian influences were only mentioned as that is where the terminology and the overall basis for a few of the classes are, i.e. Paladin, Cleric, Priest, Friar. The two religions won't exist in the game. Some of the belief systems for cultures in the game will certainly have some religious inspiration, but I do not want any modern religious conflicts to be able to cause trouble amongst the players. Religion is a part of history and a great big chunk of society, so how can it be ignored for inspiration?

Oh, that was my mistake, I was thinking from the first post that you were talking about a fantasy game, but then I read your statement mentioning a science fiction novel, and I thought you meant you were saying the game's story was the science fiction novel, so I was trying to figure out where the science fiction part was, and I decided the setting must be futuristic, lol.

I'm confused how you can have a religious class without the corresponding religion existing in the game - don't you need to have some class-specific exposition explaining how they get their powers from god, or something like that?

Your last sentence there was probably rhetorical, but actually as an atheist I don't have any problem designing religion-free fantasy or science fiction settings. On the other hand I think religion is interesting in the abstract, it can be fun to design fantasy cults and things, and they can be thematically powerful 'characters' in one's fiction... that's getting quite off-topic though.

Well, let me just confess I started typing at around midnight and with odds and ends I didn't finish it until like 1am. Yes, I had a sci-fi novel established, but I had self doubts about being able to make it a novel so I had to place it on the back burner until I can figure out what to do with it.

To the game: I don't mind letting some of the classes in a fantasy setting gaining powers through their beliefs, and with this setting in particular, quite a few will gain power through their beliefs. Whether it is in a God, nature, science, or some other manner. The classes that I listed, Paladin/Cleric/Friar/Priest, in particular, are titled from Earth's Catholic and Christian history. I want the classes to be inspired by their namesake, but I fear letting them keep their religion would cause problems within the player base. I think it may be an unfounded fear, but I was under the assumption that it would be best for me to alter their religions just enough so that it would be a fantasy religion, not Catholicism/Christianity. I personally have no issue letting them keep their religion and having the Paladin classes be actual members of Charlemagne's court that was brought to Chern as long as it doesn't cause strife within the game from those intolerant of others' religions.

Shared dungeons give lone wolves more of a chance to experience dungeons?

Doesn't count unless the lone wolf can kill the boss themselves. Actually lone wolves are tremendously benefited by instanced dungeons which can be scaled in difficulty to match the number of players entering.

While there will be some named monsters within dungeons that are group(s) level difficulty there will also be some rarer mobs of lower difficulty to kill. Their difficulty will be finding them more so than defeating them. Unfortunately, for yourself at least, the game isn't being conceptualized to cater to solo players like some theme park games do. People will be able to solo fine and dandy, but they won't be able to accomplish everything there is to accomplish alone. They will certainly be able to give PVP a try solo, but as it is a Domain versus Domain design I hope that most people will choose to group up.

What I am trying to design is a game that is Domain vs Domain oriented where you have more invested in a game than just your character. I want collaborated efforts by players to be rewarding for the Domain rather than just rewarding the individuals.

For me, that's the core problem - I just don't want to play that kind of game. I'm actually astonished how closely the mmorpg.com list describes the kind of game I want to play - I've been anti-classes for a long time but I would have thought most people would disagree because I never see people proposing classless MMOs here on gamedev. Although I'd quibble over point 3 - my own mmo design would not have player-created guilds or cities; unsure about raiding. And I'd add an important point about how the game must be an interactive fiction experience.

Not every game is meant for everyone. Just because you don't aim to participate in the larger population doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to enjoy the game. Never grouping will certainly be a deterrent for some players though as it will be easier to accomplish things by grouping, by design. I do have another open world concept, but that is for a later day. How do you mean about the interactive fiction experience? Do you mean the game must have a story? Sure. There will be a story. Players can create their own as well. There will be quests, but they won't be as numerous as WoW/Rift/Etc as questing won't be a way to level. You can gain experience while on a quest, you will gain experience by completing it, but you won't be able to level 1-50 off of quests.

1. If you can think of some mini-games that would fit into the concept without taking away from the game I am always open to ideas on bettering the game. I plan for their to be collectibles like Ultima Online, which on it's own is a form of mini-game. When I say collectibles I am not talking about saving things in your digital binder for self pleasure, I mean ones that you can buy, sell, stash away, or proudly display.

You could either give each domain a 10% bonus on the minigame scores of its members, or you could require a certain amount of minigame play per week or other time increment as 'maintenance'.

I am at work so i will have to reread this and figure it all out lol. Appreciate the discussion Lone Wolf. I many not entirely understand the concept of minigames in this context.

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 29 April 2011 - 05:12 PM

Not every game is meant for everyone. Just because you don't aim to participate in the larger population doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to enjoy the game. Never grouping will certainly be a deterrent for some players though as it will be easier to accomplish things by grouping, by design.

You asked me personally for my opinion. I was explaining why I wasn't in your target audience. It's not about whether I could enjoy the game, sure I could enjoy some of it. It's about the fact that when I want a new MMO to play I look for the one I'm likely to enjoy the most because it's aimed at players like me. I have already played half a dozen MMOs where I hated group activity and/or pvp that was mandatory or optional but intended to be the lion's share of higher-level content; I just don't want to experience that frustration yet again. Same reason I mostly read romance novels and rarely read non-romantic science-fiction and fantasy novel any more; sure some of them are great, some parts of many of them are enjoyable, but overall the satisfaction rate is lower for genres of entertainment where I'm not in the core demographic.

How do you mean about the interactive fiction experience? Do you mean the game must have a story?

No, the standard RPG story is linear or episodic, not interactive. Interactive fiction is where the game behaves differently depending on the player's dialogue choices and actions within the game. Dating sims are the most common current example of interactive fiction in video games, but interactive fiction includes anything descended from the "choose your own adventure" type of story, including detective games where you decide where to look for clues and who to interrogate. For me, my guiding design principle is, playing an MMO should feel like stepping into a fantasy or science fiction novel, and getting to make choices and find a place for myself within that world in the same way the novel's main character does.

I many not entirely understand the concept of minigames in this context.

A minigame is a non-combat pve activity with different rules, playing pieces, and available actions from the main game; the player is rewarded with money and/or resources for scoring well at the minigame. (Sometimes they also have a pvp mode or are primarily pvp). Minigames are often used to represent how the player must use skill to gathering or craft things within the MMO world, and also commonly appear in representations of carnivals or contests within the MMO world. Some RPGs contain quests which require getting a minimum score at a minigame in order to receive a quest object as a prize. Mini-games are called that because on their own they are like a simple/small game you could play on a handheld with minimal processing capacity and memory. Tetris, solitaire, minesweeper, whack-a-mole, pinball, are all mini-games. Fishing is the most common mini-game included within an RPG - it can be seen in WoW, Zelda: Twilight Princess, Gaia Online, Okami, Harvest Moon, and Animal Crossing just to name a few. The Final Fantasy series is well known for including mini-games such as the golden saucer arcade games in FF7 and Triple Triad in FF8. The Zelda series also is well known for including minigames where only a low score is needed to advance the plot but a really high score is needed to win a heart piece or bag size/wallet size/extra bottle upgrade. WoW's Capture the Flag is an example of a team pvp minigame. Puzzle Pirates is an MMO built around minigames.
For a very reasonable fee I am available as a freelance design consultant, editor, or ghostwriter. PM me if interested.

I have a general interest in 1. games involving pet breeding or farming, and 2. interactive story romance. If you'd like to discuss one of these you may PM me.

#36Caldenfor  Members   -  Reputation: 323

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 29 April 2011 - 06:06 PM

Not every game is meant for everyone. Just because you don't aim to participate in the larger population doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to enjoy the game. Never grouping will certainly be a deterrent for some players though as it will be easier to accomplish things by grouping, by design.

You asked me personally for my opinion. I was explaining why I wasn't in your target audience. It's not about whether I could enjoy the game, sure I could enjoy some of it. It's about the fact that when I want a new MMO to play I look for the one I'm likely to enjoy the most because it's aimed at players like me. I have already played half a dozen MMOs where I hated group activity and/or pvp that was mandatory or optional but intended to be the lion's share of higher-level content; I just don't want to experience that frustration yet again. Same reason I mostly read romance novels and rarely read non-romantic science-fiction and fantasy novel any more; sure some of them are great, some parts of many of them are enjoyable, but overall the satisfaction rate is lower for genres of entertainment where I'm not in the core demographic.

How do you mean about the interactive fiction experience? Do you mean the game must have a story?

No, the standard RPG story is linear or episodic, not interactive. Interactive fiction is where the game behaves differently depending on the player's dialogue choices and actions within the game. Dating sims are the most common current example of interactive fiction in video games, but interactive fiction includes anything descended from the "choose your own adventure" type of story, including detective games where you decide where to look for clues and who to interrogate. For me, my guiding design principle is, playing an MMO should feel like stepping into a fantasy or science fiction novel, and getting to make choices and find a place for myself within that world in the same way the novel's main character does.

I many not entirely understand the concept of minigames in this context.

A minigame is a non-combat pve activity with different rules, playing pieces, and available actions from the main game; the player is rewarded with money and/or resources for scoring well at the minigame. (Sometimes they also have a pvp mode or are primarily pvp). Minigames are often used to represent how the player must use skill to gathering or craft things within the MMO world, and also commonly appear in representations of carnivals or contests within the MMO world. Some RPGs contain quests which require getting a minimum score at a minigame in order to receive a quest object as a prize. Mini-games are called that because on their own they are like a simple/small game you could play on a handheld with minimal processing capacity and memory. Tetris, solitaire, minesweeper, whack-a-mole, pinball, are all mini-games. Fishing is the most common mini-game included within an RPG - it can be seen in WoW, Zelda: Twilight Princess, Gaia Online, Okami, Harvest Moon, and Animal Crossing just to name a few. The Final Fantasy series is well known for including mini-games such as the golden saucer arcade games in FF7 and Triple Triad in FF8. The Zelda series also is well known for including minigames where only a low score is needed to advance the plot but a really high score is needed to win a heart piece or bag size/wallet size/extra bottle upgrade. WoW's Capture the Flag is an example of a team pvp minigame. Puzzle Pirates is an MMO built around minigames.

I understood from previous posts what play style you prefer. I didn't mean to try and sell my idea to you. I want to go away from common day big group requirements, such as Raids, so that people can enjoy the game rather than treating it like a second, or sometimes, first job lol. Big groups will certainly be able to work together, but at times they will be over kill and make content trivial. If people want to play trivially, that will be up to them, but I don't want that to be the case for PVP.

I think you would be able to get a kick out of my open world concept as it has less restrictions, no preset sides and the like. You would be able to be a thief, a murderer, a treasure hunter, etc. Again similarities with Ultima Online, but different in play and 3d of course. A world for you to do what you wish, with pros/cons to being good/bad.

As for the stories... I hear you. If someone isn't in love, what is the point? Whether the story actually contains this love, isn't always necessary, but the driving force or some other part of the plot needs love. The story I was writing was a boy hiding from those that killed his mother. He was inevitably protected by a family that secretly carried on their martial art traditions even though the study had been banned in Japan. Unbeknownst to the boy, the father of the family had played a role in his mother's death, though not the killer. He eventually falls in love with the daughter, though out of touch to him, he fights to avenge the death of his sensei, the mother of the martial family. It goes on to include mechs and other gadgetry, with some cognotechnological mind control capabilities to boot. Betrayal, death, love, hate, greed. Sorry, I want to eat dinner during this break so I typed this up quick.

As for mini-games I guess I just wasn't understanding the 10% you were speaking of. I enjoy puzzles and games as well. Crafting hasn't been fleshed out so there is potential for it there along with quests using them. As for the interactive story, I hope to have some of that, but as quests will be limited it may not be something experienced every day.

#37nfries88  Members   -  Reputation: 251

Like
-2Likes
Like

Posted 30 April 2011 - 12:24 AM

"1. You probably want a reason for there to be monster everywhere which the player can and should kill."

What if the MMO was designed to let the players advance and progress through activities other than killing mobs in this world?

I'm not a very big fan of the current MMO design since it has a forced "monsters everywhere" philosophy, It would be much more fun to have monsters be rarer and more scary (OMG itz a monster, run! *dies*)

Something really effective in MMO world building is giving the players an experience that can link them to this "supposedly living" world (Random events, constantly updated content, varying triggered events and very well hidden valuables).

Hmm, I guess this doesn't have much to do with writing, just throwing the idea out in the open ;p.

You sneaky squirrel, you! You stole some words out of my brain.

I personally feel that another important thing is visual identification with your character. I haven't played too many modern MMOs, but the ones that I have played (KalOnline, Silkroad Online, WoW) have failed largely in this respect, while older and generally less respected ones like Tibia and RuneScape do a fairly good job. Obviously I can't give my character my face or physique in these two games, but I can change his hairstyle and hair color (and in RS, skin tone) until it looks similar to mine -- or even just like mine. Quest/Mission-oriented Non-MMOs like Oblivion and Fallout 3/New Vegas excel here too, and while it might be taken a bit for granted I think that people respond to that whether they realize it or not.

The next important thing is immersion. You need to feel you're really a part of this fantasy world, not some intruder. NPC interaction is key here. Some other things, in addition to what you said about logical placement of monsters, is that monster loot and strength are realistic. Most MMOs fail horribly in those respects, but I don't think that players really respond to those things nearly as much as to lame NPCs. I would also add that music (if applicable) and visuals assist here, and depending on the theme used may actually have a big impact.

When I play an MMO, I want to explore. There needs to be multiple paths to a single point, maze-like dungeons I must traverse, and of course a reasonable number of monsters to pwn with my sword. Tibia was actually the greatest MMO I've played in this respect. If I get lost every now and then, you're probably doing it right.

Another important thing is the gameplay itself. The less interactive and more autonomous the gameplay, the less I feel involved. I've heard good things about WoW on boss enemies requiring groups to take down, but the general solo gameplay held my interest for so short a time that I never got to the point in the game where I could take part in these. Tibia and RuneScape fail horribly here, and so did KalOnline and Silkroad. If I've got to constantly make decisions about what hotkey I should use next even for simpler monsters, you're probably doing it right here. That's why everyone loves the boss monsters, and why people are willing to dish out hundreds or even thousands of dollars for higher-level characters: this is content you only get at those higher levels.

Puzzles. This is something very common in single-player games, but very rare in MMOs. Interesting puzzles can help with immersion, make gameplay less dry, and are not hard to implement in a client->server setting (they'd probably be less network intensive than combat).

The community is the most important thing. Sometimes I like to treat whatever MMO I'm playing like an open chatroom with people from all walks of life all around the world. Tibia once excelled here (it's chat console is a pretty big part of the game), but nowadays it's populated by bots and people with little or no English skills, so I don't really get it from there. I didn't get this from WoW, Silkroad, or KalOnline either. I did get this from RuneScape quite a bit and probably still would, but the sensitivity of the censor made communication a bit difficult sometimes. Which brings me to my next point...

The internet is for porn, netflix, harassing the mentally weak/ill, erection pills, committing or becoming a victim of identity theft, watching horrible ideas go horribly right on youtube, and sometimes some hardcore gaming. Aside for maybe netflix, none of those are very good things for children. Even if pedobear is playing your MMO to pick up "women", they've probably seen much worse things than the last three letters of class, which you will probably assume is my attempt at slipping a cussword past your daft censoring system. There's no need for it. Don't do it. It's annoying and disrupts clean, pleasant conversation just as often as it actually does its job, which as previously noted, is pointless.
Looking for paid or open-source C++ programming work. Been programming since 2005. No degree.

#38 RedPin   Banned   -  Reputation: 36

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 30 April 2011 - 11:22 PM

I think you might be interested in reading what people actually want on mmorpg.com. After reading about 20 threads of the same "historians" and "new kids" arguing back and forth the formation of a want list was created based on the reasonable aspects of their ideas and arguments. I'll go over some of the wants and desires of both sides. Amazingly, any indie team can deliver these aspects into a mmog.

1. Players simply want as many optional mini games as possible, and they require a reward or some in game changing events for winning and losing.
2. Destroy the healer class along with every other class and make every skill available in some kind of combination process and skill support system with the exception of skills based on certain items the player needs equipped.
3. Allow the player to build their character, city, guild, raid, mount, pet, and items their own way with as much control given to them as possible.
4. Players want stability, top notch connections, and also availability of the mmog.
5. Players are willing to pay for subscriptions or cash shop items that don't ruin the balance of the game, and yes most of the people posting for this were cheap skate idiots looking for a lot for no cost to them at all.

I actually have around 25 reasonable additions any "developer" can add totheir mmog list, but "6. The mmog should be complete and without bugs" is a big pet peeve that makes games or breaks games this age.

Hope that helps, and yes no matter how much a idea may sound good, may smell good, may seem to sell good, you need to be able to hear the cries of the people before you go into a epic stun lock of ideas. Down right to the formula, games are meant to make money by immersion alongside fun.

Players don't always know what they want, nor get what they want, as it may not fit into all games. I am trying to be as broad as possible with the design without taking away from the concept. When I was younger I used to want to design MY game, but over the years I have realized what I want isn't what everyone else wants. What I am trying to design is a game that is Domain vs Domain oriented where you have more invested in a game than just your character. I want collaborated efforts by players to be rewarding for the Domain rather than just rewarding the individuals.

1. If you can think of some mini-games that would fit into the concept without taking away from the game I am always open to ideas on bettering the game. I plan for their to be collectibles like Ultima Online, which on it's own is a form of mini-game. When I say collectibles I am not talking about saving things in your digital binder for self pleasure, I mean ones that you can buy, sell, stash away, or proudly display.

2. Not going to happen. There will be skills that determine the overall capabilities of the combatant, but they are restricted on a per class basis. This is for balancing mainly, but also to have characters have some individualism to them. Less of the FOTM, more of the, "I play it and I enjoy it". The power curve of the game is less than your traditional MMORPG. Level 50 in this concept would be like playing as a level 35 in DAoC with both starting at the same level 1. They just gain power more slowly. I find that games that concentrate on making characters too powerful take away from the enjoyment of combat. How many people would run around different level BGs in games just to enjoy the "non-end game PVP" purely because it was more balanced?

3. Player cities will be customizable with provided structures. They can choose the layout, but there will be a max radius(square most likely) available to build in to avoid Great Walls being built every where. Outside of homes will have slight customization options, while entering a home would be in a separate zone(instance) for the player to customize as well. I would love to avoid all instances, but I don't think it would be technologically possible to have homes like Ultima Online did without bogging down those around the home. I am trying to include taming in the game without making it too powerful, but also enjoyable. Potential for pet customization would be in finding various visuals, some more rare than others, while being able to help train your pet. There is a possibility for raising pets from egg form.

4. Graphics are going to be good, but "next-gen" is out of the question unless it provides for many people battling simultaneously. I don't think it will be too hard to imagine 200+ players getting together for fights. If all goes well it could even rear up to 600+ in a close proximity(same zone). Quality of play comes before graphics to an extent.

5. I don't really see room for a cash shop, but a subscription would be a certainty if it all works out.

Gotta run.

Well, I see another strong headed dreamer that doesn't think that the masses of players can speak up. When in the market of cookie cutter games versus sand box games, in which all seem to be the same, you need to listen to the community. Developers refuse to listen to the cries and changes needed to go back into pure immersion and fun. I do like some of the aspects of the game you want, and if you're dead set on that style of game that's fine, but I will head a warning that others seem to shrug off til their pockets are burnt.

1. Mostly put in what people want for mini games. I can come up with 20 mini games that will fit most mmogs. You need to design a game that will fit those mini games and make ppl happy. Design every tier to have tier specific mini games to draw ppl into leveling or achieving that tier.

2. People are tired of being told that they can not do this, or the same old mechanic systems from another game. Once more, people wish for no classes, skills to associate or penalize the player for having other skills in a reverse tree, and also to create a skill based combat system. Sure, it'll be unbalanced, but why do a linear type class system that you need balancing and just let people pick the skills they want and like and formulate a balance themselves? It's by trial and error people have the most fun finding out about formulas and such.

3. You need to think about more than just customization, you need to also think about functionality. You need to have a reason for them to take the cities, a initiative. Yeah, its cool to just take cities, but without the motives then there is no reason for them to do it more than 1x. You can implement a dynamic changing siege system for almost about everything. Also, if it's subscription spend some time into making a sandbox for their armors, characters, skills, and pets and mounts. You can also make a combo sandbox editor for the skills and various other things in the game. Allowing a player to make his own mini game is far more fun and adds tons of hours of replay value than having a preset mini game that doesn't involve or change the players interaction into the environment.

4. I'm not talking about graphics, I'm talking about technology. You need a T48 connection with multiple server shards and multiple T48 connections to handle lag and balancing. A good Dedicated pc for hundreds of thousands of players is $100k each, and figure around 50 or so for 1M players. I'd gauge at minimum 10-15 T48 internet connections to help reduce the lag of internet connections. It might come also down to hardware specs for the average pc end user that will play your game, but ultimately if it lags on the internet connection, if your servers aren't accessible and if your servers are always down, people will leave. 5. You're subscription can be greatly effected by what you do with your game. Your game is there to solve the communities problems, and your goal, job, directive, w.e., is to make sure that you meet their needs. Earning money by providing people with a solution to their problems by offering your game that solves that problem is 100x more profitable than making another cookie cutter mmog. Think on it, is your game in your mind worth$50 box price and a $15 monthly subscription? To you it may be, but to the community it is a totally different story. You are to cater to the masses, not to your own (butt). Hope that enlightens someone on here, even with just my suggestions I currently think you will draw more attention and sales than just by going with what you initially wanted. You need to decide to add what the masses want, and what you might like to see together, and get rid of anything from your side, yes yours not theirs, that conflicts with each other. ~ Red Failure is simply denying the truth and refusing to adapt for success. Failure is synthetic, invented by man to justify his laziness and lack of moral conduct. What truely lies within failure is neither primative or genetic. What failure is at the heart, is man's inability to rise and meet the challenge. Success is natural, only happening when man stops trying to imitate a synthetic or imaginable object. Once man starts acting outside his emotional standpoints, he will stop trying to imitate synthetic or imaginable objects called forth by the replication of his emptiness inside his mind. Man's mind is forever idle and therefore shall call forth through the primitives of such subconscious thoughts and behaviors that Success is unnatural and that failure is natural. Success is simply doing something at man's full natural abilities and power, failure is the inability to act on what man wants, dreams, wishes, invisions, or thinks himself to do. ~ RED (concluded when I was 5 years old looking at the world with wide eyes) #39Caldenfor Members - Reputation: 323 Like -2Likes Like Posted 01 May 2011 - 04:42 PM I think you might be interested in reading what people actually want on mmorpg.com. After reading about 20 threads of the same "historians" and "new kids" arguing back and forth the formation of a want list was created based on the reasonable aspects of their ideas and arguments. I'll go over some of the wants and desires of both sides. Amazingly, any indie team can deliver these aspects into a mmog. 1. Players simply want as many optional mini games as possible, and they require a reward or some in game changing events for winning and losing. 2. Destroy the healer class along with every other class and make every skill available in some kind of combination process and skill support system with the exception of skills based on certain items the player needs equipped. 3. Allow the player to build their character, city, guild, raid, mount, pet, and items their own way with as much control given to them as possible. 4. Players want stability, top notch connections, and also availability of the mmog. 5. Players are willing to pay for subscriptions or cash shop items that don't ruin the balance of the game, and yes most of the people posting for this were cheap skate idiots looking for a lot for no cost to them at all. I actually have around 25 reasonable additions any "developer" can add totheir mmog list, but "6. The mmog should be complete and without bugs" is a big pet peeve that makes games or breaks games this age. Hope that helps, and yes no matter how much a idea may sound good, may smell good, may seem to sell good, you need to be able to hear the cries of the people before you go into a epic stun lock of ideas. Down right to the formula, games are meant to make money by immersion alongside fun. Players don't always know what they want, nor get what they want, as it may not fit into all games. I am trying to be as broad as possible with the design without taking away from the concept. When I was younger I used to want to design MY game, but over the years I have realized what I want isn't what everyone else wants. What I am trying to design is a game that is Domain vs Domain oriented where you have more invested in a game than just your character. I want collaborated efforts by players to be rewarding for the Domain rather than just rewarding the individuals. 1. If you can think of some mini-games that would fit into the concept without taking away from the game I am always open to ideas on bettering the game. I plan for their to be collectibles like Ultima Online, which on it's own is a form of mini-game. When I say collectibles I am not talking about saving things in your digital binder for self pleasure, I mean ones that you can buy, sell, stash away, or proudly display. 2. Not going to happen. There will be skills that determine the overall capabilities of the combatant, but they are restricted on a per class basis. This is for balancing mainly, but also to have characters have some individualism to them. Less of the FOTM, more of the, "I play it and I enjoy it". The power curve of the game is less than your traditional MMORPG. Level 50 in this concept would be like playing as a level 35 in DAoC with both starting at the same level 1. They just gain power more slowly. I find that games that concentrate on making characters too powerful take away from the enjoyment of combat. How many people would run around different level BGs in games just to enjoy the "non-end game PVP" purely because it was more balanced? 3. Player cities will be customizable with provided structures. They can choose the layout, but there will be a max radius(square most likely) available to build in to avoid Great Walls being built every where. Outside of homes will have slight customization options, while entering a home would be in a separate zone(instance) for the player to customize as well. I would love to avoid all instances, but I don't think it would be technologically possible to have homes like Ultima Online did without bogging down those around the home. I am trying to include taming in the game without making it too powerful, but also enjoyable. Potential for pet customization would be in finding various visuals, some more rare than others, while being able to help train your pet. There is a possibility for raising pets from egg form. 4. Graphics are going to be good, but "next-gen" is out of the question unless it provides for many people battling simultaneously. I don't think it will be too hard to imagine 200+ players getting together for fights. If all goes well it could even rear up to 600+ in a close proximity(same zone). Quality of play comes before graphics to an extent. 5. I don't really see room for a cash shop, but a subscription would be a certainty if it all works out. Gotta run. Well, I see another strong headed dreamer that doesn't think that the masses of players can speak up. When in the market of cookie cutter games versus sand box games, in which all seem to be the same, you need to listen to the community. Developers refuse to listen to the cries and changes needed to go back into pure immersion and fun. I do like some of the aspects of the game you want, and if you're dead set on that style of game that's fine, but I will head a warning that others seem to shrug off til their pockets are burnt. 1. Mostly put in what people want for mini games. I can come up with 20 mini games that will fit most mmogs. You need to design a game that will fit those mini games and make ppl happy. Design every tier to have tier specific mini games to draw ppl into leveling or achieving that tier. 2. People are tired of being told that they can not do this, or the same old mechanic systems from another game. Once more, people wish for no classes, skills to associate or penalize the player for having other skills in a reverse tree, and also to create a skill based combat system. Sure, it'll be unbalanced, but why do a linear type class system that you need balancing and just let people pick the skills they want and like and formulate a balance themselves? It's by trial and error people have the most fun finding out about formulas and such. 3. You need to think about more than just customization, you need to also think about functionality. You need to have a reason for them to take the cities, a initiative. Yeah, its cool to just take cities, but without the motives then there is no reason for them to do it more than 1x. You can implement a dynamic changing siege system for almost about everything. Also, if it's subscription spend some time into making a sandbox for their armors, characters, skills, and pets and mounts. You can also make a combo sandbox editor for the skills and various other things in the game. Allowing a player to make his own mini game is far more fun and adds tons of hours of replay value than having a preset mini game that doesn't involve or change the players interaction into the environment. 4. I'm not talking about graphics, I'm talking about technology. You need a T48 connection with multiple server shards and multiple T48 connections to handle lag and balancing. A good Dedicated pc for hundreds of thousands of players is$100k each, and figure around 50 or so for 1M players. I'd gauge at minimum 10-15 T48 internet connections to help reduce the lag of internet connections. It might come also down to hardware specs for the average pc end user that will play your game, but ultimately if it lags on the internet connection, if your servers aren't accessible and if your servers are always down, people will leave.

5. You're subscription can be greatly effected by what you do with your game. Your game is there to solve the communities problems, and your goal, job, directive, w.e., is to make sure that you meet their needs. Earning money by providing people with a solution to their problems by offering your game that solves that problem is 100x more profitable than making another cookie cutter mmog. Think on it, is your game in your mind worth $50 box price and a$15 monthly subscription? To you it may be, but to the community it is a totally different story. You are to cater to the masses, not to your own (butt).

Hope that enlightens someone on here, even with just my suggestions I currently think you will draw more attention and sales than just by going with what you initially wanted. You need to decide to add what the masses want, and what you might like to see together, and get rid of anything from your side, yes yours not theirs, that conflicts with each other.

~ Red

I never said I didn't want "mini-games", but I don't want "Gems" or whatever it was from EQ. I would want game mechanics that existed for players to interact with to fill this role. I also don't see it as being overly impossible to have little game objects that could actually be played in the game. How hard would it be to make a windowed game within the world where people could play board/card games/etc. No, not monopoly. Something more fitting to the genre.

If you are talking about me I am not entirely sure what you are talking about for most of that post. Things being expensive and technologically challenging, yes, cool. I never said I actually thought the game would be made nor that it would be inexpensive. I would certainly like to play a game with an RVR type gameplay, but there aren't many, if any, options available currently other than a dated MMO originating ten years ago.

As to the rest of it, why do you think that it is a sandbox? PVP is separate from PVE only areas so that seems quite the opposite of a sandbox. You can't attack your allies. You have limits, thus, not a sandbox.

Why is it a copy of something else? Because it has PVP objectives similar to older DAoC? I don't see as that being a bad thing. You may not have enjoyed PVP in DAoC, prior to ToA, but there are more people than just myself that really enjoyed the thought behind it as I see it on multiple forums. I already stated why player cities are of use and how they would actually be useful to the players. If you feel I didn't properly explain it, or feel the explanation was inadequate, please feel free to offer suggestions to make them of more use. Player cities aren't for PVP combat. That is a PVE only portion of the game where player cities are made.

I did, however, believe that potentially making the cities controlled by NPCs that grow over time as being part of the game, but why take that part of the game away from the players other than to implement cities with less complications, also known as humans, to worry about.

And on a final note, if you find anyone that can balance a skill based system rather than class based for a competitive and enjoyable PVP experience, please let me know. People all want cookie-cutters, sadly, classes is one of the ways of preventing that and it works quite well. People think they know what they want and think it will always work. I am not absolved from this statement either. I don't imagine a "wow-killer", I think of a quality game for people to enjoy to fill more than just a "niche" in the system. While I claim it would be similar to RVR, you could actually play the game and have fun without ever participating in RVR, unless of course the game is composed as garbage. I wouldn't expect this concept to be the next big thing and who would want to be it? Currently "the next big thing" keeps turning up to be a steaming pile.

If any of this is read as being aggressive, defensive, whatever, it isn't and is never intended.

#40 RedPin   Banned   -  Reputation: 36

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 02 May 2011 - 12:19 AM

My response was never intended to be coming off as offensive or a direct aggression act towards you. It seems that the internet can lead to things being more than they are. My post is not "aggressive" it's "informative". Currently, all it does is plug valid information from what people want, and what developers ignore into it. It also comes with insight into spec hardware, even though it is a small insight. Don't misread what I say as me forcing my ideas onto you, do as you please. I've stated that it's a suggestion to help improve mix and improve with your views and ideas, but it was left up to you to understand that. Your other response did however, show some signs that you refused to look into what people were crying out for, and that triggered my response posted above. People repeat failure theme park MMOGs because they think people don't know what they want. Yet again it points to the evidence of doing some research on the why MMO gamers flop around so much to different MMOGs.

If you find nothing I have said of value, then ignore it and go on your MMOG way. My post is for those who listen. My post is for those that want to improve their genre, not flop around with editing the same mix of cookie dough that makes cookie cutter games. Yes, you can improve upon games of old, you can do w.e. you want. Don't find my posts wanting you to follow them like a rule book. They are not meant for that.

Now, let me get back to what I was posting about since it confused you, it may confuse others. My posts are not hard to read or understand, yet people with closed minds find them hard to read. It does not mean anyone on here, or refer to anyone, including you as a closed mind. You simply just misunderstood what I had said, so it was in fact a communication error brought on by the internet.

Now lets begin with what a MMOG developer could compile as useful information.

MMOG players want social back into their games. A form of social can unite them as mini games, or in reference miniature games designed around the theme of the MMORPG that allows a player a alternative form of player other than combat. This allows the player some sort of glimpse of being able to do something other than kill or be killed. Mini games that any MMOG can have inside them can be thought up or found from ideas from other games. I won't spoon feed anyone on here.

Now think for a second here, PVP and PVE are not suppose to be separate. What you are suppose to do is encourage them to do both, but allow real world penalties to overcome those that abuse such a system. You're the developer, you come up with the risks and rewards of such a fluid system. The integration needs to be seamless else it will become another turd yet to rot away on the pile of MMORPG history.

Sandbox is where it is at. Sandbox means players can build with the tools you provide them, and build what you say they can build to a certain extent their way. Linear means you already chose everything for them, you don't give them the tools to build anything their way. Simply put, make your game as much sandbox as possible. Players will stick around much longer than 3 months.

Now, latency is a big pet peeve of everyones. Think on this part a bit. You want the best connections, best hardware, and the best looking graphics mixed in. None of this is even an argument, it's a necessity. Hands down, anyone who skips this should be shot dead in their sleep.

I hope that by now maybe someone has learned a bit more into what to do to make a good MMOG. My only hope is that at least 1 person learned some valuable information from this. This was never intended to pwn, assault, or make people feel unhappy. It's for educational purposes only. Thank you.

~ RED
Failure is simply denying the truth and refusing to adapt for success. Failure is synthetic, invented by man to justify his laziness and lack of moral conduct. What truely lies within failure is neither primative or genetic. What failure is at the heart, is man's inability to rise and meet the challenge. Success is natural, only happening when man stops trying to imitate a synthetic or imaginable object. Once man starts acting outside his emotional standpoints, he will stop trying to imitate synthetic or imaginable objects called forth by the replication of his emptiness inside his mind. Man's mind is forever idle and therefore shall call forth through the primitives of such subconscious thoughts and behaviors that Success is unnatural and that failure is natural. Success is simply doing something at man's full natural abilities and power, failure is the inability to act on what man wants, dreams, wishes, invisions, or thinks himself to do. ~ RED (concluded when I was 5 years old looking at the world with wide eyes)

Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

PARTNERS